Kanjorski To Announce Energy Institute Formation Today

Later today Paul Kanjorski is expected to announce ANOTHER 1,000 jobs coming to our area via an Energy Institute he proposed earlier in the year. In this Citizen's Voice article by Michael Sisak Kanjorski shared the details of his plan on April 10, 2010.

Kanjorski, D-Nanticoke, envisions a public-private partnership between the federal government and regional colleges and universities which would support a "smart growth" approach to the gas drilling and infuse the region with more than 1,000 jobs. The institute would initially be funded through a five-year allocation of federal energy funds, he said.

Pay carefull attention to the ultimate players in this Energy Institute. Its more of our "Free Money".
"I have had the desire to have something that really manages the development, the smart development, of an energy field such as ours," Kanjorski said Friday.

Without planned development, the drilling of the Marcellus Shale could develop haphazardly, with rival gas companies crisscrossing the four-state shale footprint with independent pipelines, roads and waterways.

"At the state level, everyone's walking around saying, 'well, the state government is the only one with jurisdiction,' and the state government isn't doing very much about it," Kanjorski said. "At the federal level, we're looking at this."

Did I just read that Paul Kanjorski was telling Todd Eachus he is not doing his job?

Wilkes and the 12 other colleges and universities within Kanjorski's Congressional district could partner to shape the institute's long-term research, policy development and impact on the Marcellus Shale.

Jack Chielli, a spokesman for Wilkes University, confirmed the school's involvement in the proposed institute, but said, "it is a bit premature to be able to be commenting on this in any substantive way, because it's in the development stage.

Just as Joe Sestak lied about using non-profits to hide earmarks in his latest scandal it appears Kanjorski is following the same path. Earlier this year he hid an earmark for Schott Glass through the University of Scranton.

As this article points out some for profit companies are forming non-profit entities so they can circumvent the congressional ban on earmarks. Kanjorski appears to use a little different twist with Schott Glass and announced a "partnership" between the non-profit and the for-profit Schott Glass to skirt the rules. After all it was Paul Kanjorski who said "we have our own rules and we allocate this money."

If Paul Kanjorski is bringing all these jobs to Northeastern Pennsylvania why is our jobless rate at an all time high, why did our foreclosure rate jump 74%, and why are our home sales the lowest in 15 years?

Paul, we are patiently waiting for your answer.

Update: Like I said. Fiber optics, high speed rail, moving sidewalks, embassy training center, Wall Street West, Cornerstone Technologies..blah, blah, blah, blah. The catch-all phrase. The institute could continue receiving $1 million in DOE funding for the next few years, based on performance, need, and on the annual federal budget If it such a great idea Paul with the utomost significance to the area why is it that funding is guaranteed only for this year? Hmmmm...race..behind..yep that outta do it.

Eachus-I Won't Follow Your Rules

At Tuesday night's meeting regarding a permit application by Hazleton Creek Properties Todd Eachus displayed the type of behaviors that have become all too common with him according to those having any dealings with the solon.

In the introductory portion of the meeting DEP Director of Communications Helen Humphreys laid out the rules of the evening. She stated that audience members could ask one question at a time. After everyone had an opportunity to be heard she said she would allow audience members more time to ask additional questions.

According to witnesses in the audience Todd Eachus ran up to the podium to be first. He told Ms. Humphreys "I appreciate your setting the rules but I represent all the people here so I will ask as many questions as I want." Imagine a legislator that thinks he has more important things to say at a hearing than his constituents. Arrogance is something Eachus has worked hard to perfect. He basically told her "I won't follow your rules". That is what brought him smack dab in the middle of Bonusgate. Start at Exhibit F and work your way down. .

When Donna D'Amato turned to Eachus and said, "You said you represent everybody here. I am part of everybody here." he responded by stating "I won't be interrogated." That statement probably explains why he refused to testify before the Grand Jury investigating Bonusgate when he was given an invitation by Attorney General Tom Corbett.

This testimony may offer a glimpse into why he received that invitation and is undeniably in the middle of Bonusgate.

In a May 2008 grand jury appearance, Jones said that while he was working for the House Democratic Campaign Committee in the run-up to that pivotal 2006 election, he and another campaign committee employee worked closely with Eachus out of an office in the Capitol’s East Wing.

He said they helped Eachus phone Democratic state representatives to pressure them either to donate to the campaign committee or promise to spend a certain amount on their own races.

“As Todd would often say, he wanted to spend what he called soft dollars, which were government dollars, on public service announcements so that we had to ultimately spend less hard campaign dollars,” Jones testified.

Jones said that for a time he and two other legislative aides spent nearly all day on political matters, raising money and performing other campaign-related duties. A phone number could not be located for Jones.

An unidentified state prosecutor, in the grand jury transcript, asked Jones whether Eachus was “directing and encouraging” their campaign efforts.

“Oh, yeah, sure,” Jones responded. “There were plenty of times where (an aide) and I would be in to make phone calls or to staff Todd so he could make fundraising phone calls out of his office.”

Eachus was closely allied with former House Whip Mike Veon, D-Beaver, whom prosecutors have portrayed as a leading figure in a conspiracy to divert public employees and resources for campaign work before he lost re-election in 2006.

Veon and as many as four others with ties to House Democrats are expected to go on trial next month on charges of theft, conspiracy and conflict of interest.

Veon co-defendant Rachel Manzo had been House Democratic policy committee executive director under Eachus at the time of her arrest in July 2008. On the same August day that she appeared before the grand jury, she signed an agreement with prosecutors to plead guilty to a single misdemeanor count of theft of services.

A prosecutor asked Manzo about talking to Eachus about moving state workers spending time on campaigns to another office, according to a transcript.

“So those discussions manifested direct knowledge by Eachus that these people were involved in politics as part of their daily work?” the prosecutor asked.

“Yes,” she testified. “He used them daily for politics.”

Eachus worked for Paul Kanjorski. It appears the apple doesn't fall far from the tree where rules are concerned. Let's revisit one of Paul Kanjorski's more memorable moments.

During the interview, Kanjorski said he was “used to getting a great deal of money for my district” and when questioned about the funding for the garage, Kanjorski used the term “free money.” He said it was “free money for the community” because it “doesn’t cause any difficulty for the community to take that money."

Kanjorski said that in Congress “we have our own rules and we allocate this money.”

While Todd Eachus insists he wants to ask all the questions he wants tell him you just want to ask one question. Mr. Eachus how many times did you fly on Mr. Robert Powell's jet and did you declare it on your Ethics Commission filing? See if he is willing to answer just one question.

You might want to ask just one more question. Mr. Eachus can you enlighten the public about the altercation that took place after the event in the parking lot between you and one of your chief of staff and two participants who attended the hearing?

When Mr. Eachus ran for office he told the public he was in favor of term limits. Maybe it is time he keep that campaign promise.

Kanjorski's Gaffe Regarding Minorities And More

Yesterday a story went viral concerning Congressman Paul Kanjorski's statement made during a joint House-Senate conference committee session where he contrasted minorities with "good American people". He immediately came under fire and sparked an uproar for the his antithesis position.

Despite those who rushed to his rescue it was fair for the opposition to ask Kanjo to explain himself. After all this lapse in judgement isn't the first time for the seasoned Congressman. It's funny how its fair game for the media to quickly seize on comments made by VP Joe Biden or former VP Dan Quayle, yet Kanjorski's corner wants a hands off rule.  Here's what a hypothetical interview would sound like over Kanjo's ridiculous statements that border on irrational.

Reporter: Congressman Kanjorski can you please explain what you meant by "defective" people?
Kanjorski: Uhhh that isn't what I meant
Reporter: Congressman Kanjorski can you please explain what you meant when you said "But you know, the temptation to want to win back the Congress, we sort of stretched the facts...and people ate it up."?
Kanjorski: Uhhh that isn't what I meant
Reporter: Congressman Kanjorski can you please explain in these economic times what you meant when you said "We are helluva alot better off as a country and as an economy than we have ever been in the history of mankind"?
Kanjorski: Uhhh that isn't what I meant
Reporter: Congressman Kanjorski can you please explain what you meant by
"Financially, I don't have to be a democrat. I've got enough economics that I'm not going to suffer, but I'm telling you I don't like to live around extreme poverty"?
Kanjorski: Uhhh that isn't what I meant
Reporter: Congressman Kanjorski can you please explain what you meant when you said "I don't apologize to anyone" when asked if you would apologize to the troops for your statement over the war in Iraq
Kanjorski: Uhhh that isn't what I meant
Reporter: Congressman Kanjorski can you please explain what you meant when you stated that our federal tax dollars are "free money"?
Kanjorski: Uhhh that isn't what I meant

If the opposition is so wrong could Lou Barletta have that much influence to see that a headline like this one from the Los Angeles Times Rep. Paul Kanjorski says his plan helps 'good American people,' not 'minorities' or 'defective' people makes it to print? Why did the Los Angeles Times question his other statement later in that diatribe?

In his pitch, Kanjorski tells Capitol Hill legislative colleagues that expanding his state's mortgage aid program nationally would only cost "3 lousy billion dollars." After all threee lousy billion dollars is only free money.

One would think by now that the Democratic party would cut its loses and let Kanjo ride off into the retirement sunset. Attacking conservative sterotypes by validating liberal sterotypes isn't something one can fix. It is a fatal flaw and won't win elections.