A bomb explosion at an Oregon bank Dec. 12 that killed two police officers and seriously injured a third has raised questions about why officials didn't utilize sophisticated and costly equipment purchased by the state to prevent precisely these incidents from occurring. Officials plan to ask the FBI to help determine what went wrong.
One of the two men killed in the Woodburn, Ore. blast was a bomb expert with the Oregon State Police. Also killed was a Woodburn police captain. The city’s police chief lost part of his leg and remains hospitalized. Two suspects have been arrested in the case.
Reporters have revealed that state police failed to deploy at the scene an Explosive Ordinance Detection vehicle purchased for its bomb squad with the help of a 2006 federal grant, but no further details about the equipment were previously made public.
Records obtained from the state by the Center for Investigative Reporting show that the Oregon State Police in 2004 alone spent more than $600,000 in federal homeland security grants on bomb mitigation and armored-response equipment that apparently wasn't used to aid in ensuring the safety of the three men.
The purchases include the ordinance detection vehicle, a 28-foot long International assembled by Braun Northwest Inc., a Washington state-based company that specializes in emergency equipment. The vehicle cost $170,000, according to records.
"Our response has been that we're not going to go into details at this time because we don't know all the facts about the equipment that was there," Lt. Gregg Hastings, a spokesman for the state police, told CIR Dec. 19. After a criminal investigation is complete, officials plan to ask the FBI for help in conducting an internal review.
Hastings concedes that the ordinance-detection vehicle, based in Salem about 18 miles away, was not on the scene. "We have a lot more to learn here and we need to sit down with the FBI," he said.
Records obtained by CIR show that the Oregon State Police spent $427,000 from the grant funds on two bomb robots described in the documents only as F6A models, similar to this here manufactured by defense giant Northrop Grumman.
The state police spent another $265,000 on an armored SWAT truck known as a Lenco B.E.A.R, of which there are two models here. You can see Flickr photos of the department’s actual SWAT vehicle at this link. Images of two different bomb-response trucks owned by the state police, including the International, can be seen here on the department’s Web site.
The records show that the state police spent an additional $334,000 on more general equipment designed for defeating explosive devices, but those expenditures are not itemized in the grant documents CIR obtained.
In all, records show that since 2002, the Oregon State Police Department has been awarded approximately $8.8 million by the federal government in homeland security grants for a variety of purchases including search and rescue gear, personal protective equipment and hundreds of thousands in new interoperable communications improvements.
Other emergency personnel in the region have tools that could have been used to carefully diffuse the bomb. The Salem Fire Department, located not far from Woodburn, has spent more than $300,000 in homeland security grants since 2002 on 15 ballistic helmets, a $17,400 bomb suit, a $183,000 robot and $28,000 worth of X-ray equipment, according to state records.
Bomb robots can neutralize an ordinance device by triggering it with a water cannon or shotgun shell. The bomb can also be detonated safely after being placed in a containment vessel, one of which the state police department owns.
Hastings said that the Salem Fire Department was not involved in responding to the initial calls regarding bomb threats made at two neighboring Woodburn banks.
The police bureau in Portland, Ore., situated about 30 miles from Woodburn, possesses at least $219,000 worth of bomb-mitigation equipment purchased with 2003 homeland security grants including a $166,000 robot. The Portland Office of Emergency Management made $38,000 in such expenditures using 2004 grants, while the Port of Portland purchased a $40,000 Ford Expedition for bomb-response purposes with 2003 grant funds.
According to an affidavit and news accounts, the bomb squad technician killed in the Dec. 12 explosion believed the device was a hoax after a false-alarm call was made earlier that day about a bomb being located nearby at a Wells Fargo location. In a move that surprised some bomb experts interviewed by the Oregonian newspaper, the expert attempted to open the green metal box and examine its contents for evidence after a bank manager found it.
The technician had conducted an X-ray examination of the box and concluded it was harmless.
Hal Lowder, an explosives expert based in Atlanta, told the Oregonian that because police sometimes receive a high volume of calls involving hoax devices, they can be lulled into a routine that causes them to lower their guard. "That's why we always stress keeping your fingers out of it," Lowder told the paper.
"An X-ray is just not 100 percent," Lowder told the newspaper. “You may miss something because there's so many variables. It sounds like he made a judgment call, just a bad call. ... I hate to say bad things, but taking a bomb apart is just not done anymore." Specialists added that perpetrators sometimes lure police into a bomb’s destructive range by planting a mock device.
Within days of the incident police arrested 57-year-old Bruce Turnidge and his son Joshua, 32, for the crime, although no motive has been established. According to news accounts, the Turnidge family helped found the Salem Academy Christian schools. Police were searching the father's 750-acre farm Dec. 16 for more evidence. Each man has been charged with several counts of aggravated murder, assault, possession and conspiracy.
According to an affidavit, investigators obtained purchase records and surveillance footage from two area Wal-Mart locations that allegedly linked Joshua Turnidge to items used in the bombing. The evidence cited in the affidavit includes two disposable cell phones, airtime cards for the phones and a can of green spray paint. Numbers associated with the phones were reportedly used in threatening calls made to a Wells Fargo bank warning that if the building wasn't vacated, “all of them would die.”
Services were held on Friday and Saturday respectively for Woodburn Police Capt. Thomas Tennant and Oregon State Police Trooper William Hakim. Woodburn Police Chief Scott Russell remains hospitalized in serious condition.
Tonight on KQED public radio in San Francisco, Mark Schapiro appears on Health Dialogues in a discussion about toxins in consumer products, and efforts by the California Green Chemistry Initiative signed by Governor Schwarzenegger to put California at the forefront of chemical reform, aligning state laws more closely to those of the European Union.
Also, in this month's issue of Mother Jones, Schapiro writes about the economic consequences of the EU’s environmental initiatives, which challenge many of the cost predictions by industry and the long-reining American presumption that such measures are incompatible with economic growth.
At least 50 deaths in the U.S. since 2001 are linked to Taser stun guns, according to autopsy reports and research compiled by Amnesty International.
Tuesday's report generated headlines from Britain to Iran. Though it's not the first time deaths have been reported following police Taser strikes (Amnesty now counts 334 in the U.S.; the Arizona Republic counts 400+ in the U.S. and Canada), it is the first time an organization has reported that there are at least 50 deaths in which coroners and medical examiners have cited the Taser as a factor.
It was just one nugget in the 130-page report. There were recommendations regarding Tasers (suspend use or limit them to life-threatening situations); chilling examples of misuse; and other noteworthy statistics—for example, of the 334 people who have died nationwide since 2001 following police Taser strikes (Amnesty's count), 90 percent were unarmed. Newspapers from Boston to Las Vegas jumped on the report.
But Wall Street didn't care.
A quick primer: Government agencies are the biggest purchasers of Tasers (thus comprising a huge chunk of Taser International's revenue). Those agencies are ultimately responsive to voters and taxpayers. Negative headlines can sway public opinion, which in turn affect decisions made by policymakers (e.g. equipping the local police department with Tasers). So when cities decide not to buy Tasers it impacts the company's sales, thus Taser's stock price. (Taser CEO Rick Smith has talked about this, and we detailed it in "Gannett Papers Shocked by Taser's Claims.")
In this case, however, Amnesty's critical report didn't impact investors. Between Monday—the day before Amnesty released its report—to Wednesday's close, Taser's stock price jumped 15 percent. By comparison, the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index and the Nasdaq—the market Taser shares trade on—were up about four percent.
This isn't the first time investors didn't punish Taser because of a negative Amnesty report. In November 2004 Amnesty released its first full report on Taser-related deaths, also on a Tuesday. Between the previous day's close (Monday) to the following day's close (Wednesday) Taser's stock price went up 11 percent. During that same period the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq barely moved—both markets crawled about one percent higher.
Amnesty International, it seems, doesn't carry much weight on Wall Street.
Who's in charge of investigating the handling of Chauncey Bailey's murder case? It seems to be a political hot potato, according to a new article from The Chauncey Bailey Project.
The California Attorney General's office recently sent a letter to Mayor Ron Dellums declaring that state investigators want to be present when Oakland police internal affairs detectives interview members of their command staff. But the Attorney General's office will not take over the entire investigation, which according to the letter, is what Oakland internal affairs investigators requested.
The Oakland police being investigated by internal affairs include Detective Sgt. Derwin Longmire, the lead investigator of Bailey's killing; his boss, homicide unit Lt. Ersie Joyner; and Deputy Chief Jeffrey Loman.
An article in the San Francisco Chronicle this week also added more details about police blunders in the Bailey murder case.
An eye-witness account of the actions and statements of Your Black Muslim Bakery's leader Yusuf Bey IV immediately before and after Bailey's shooting on August 2, 2007, apparently was put in a different case file. The eye-witness report surfaced two months ago when a prosecutor found it by chance after requesting access to the other file. The Chauncey Bailey Project reported that police ignored several key pieces of evidence, including this eye-witness account, in an October 25 story:
The Bailey Project has also learned that police have a statement from another bakery associate who said Bey IV called a meeting the night before the killing. He ordered his followers to pray for strength, said two police officers knowledgeable of the statement.
The bakery associate told police that Bey IV, Mackey and Broussard also prayed together separately and complained that they had to wake at 5 a.m. the next day. After the killing, there was a mood of celebration at the bakery, the associate told police. Officers asked that the person’s name not be revealed, saying disclosure could endanger the person’s life.
The Chronicle provided further details this week:
... A woman who worked at the black self-empowerment organization on San Pablo Avenue in Oakland had told police that bakery leader Yusuf Bey IV was in a celebratory mood at the news of Bailey's slaying on Aug. 2, 2007.
"That will teach 'em to f- with me," she quoted Bey as saying.
The woman also related how Bey was "not happy" with Bailey's reporting on the bakery's financial collapse, and said she had overheard a telephone conversation in which Bey and another man apparently were "scoping out" Bailey's whereabouts the day before the Oakland Post editor was shot to death on a downtown Oakland street.
Hours before the killing, she said, Bey awoke at 5 a.m. to pray.
Oakland police admitted to the blunder Monday. Deputy Chief Jeff Israel told the Chronicle that Sergeant Derwin Longmire, the lead detective investigating Bailey's murder, had been notified of the eye-witness account, but the detectives involved later decided the statement was not relevant to Bailey's case.
"We definitely made a mistake here, no question," Israel told the Chronicle. "It's very troubling ... After I've listened to the interview, it was obviously relevant."
We'd be remiss if we didn't single out other great investigations into Taser, like this one from CBC News and Radio-Canada. The two news organizations teamed up to produce an amazing piece that aired Thursday night in Canada. The Arizona Republic, Taser International's hometown paper, published a piece on the findings in Friday's paper. Here's their lede:
A new study has found that the type of Taser stun gun used most by police officers can fire more electricity than the company says is possible, which the study's authors say raises the risk of cardiac arrest as much as 50 percent in some people.
The study, led by a Montreal biomedical engineer and a U.S. defense contractor at the request of the Canadian Broadcasting Corp., also concluded that even stun guns firing at expected electrical levels carry some risk of inducing a heart attack, depending on the circumstances.
The researchers' analysis contradicts Taser's position that electric shocks from the weapons cannot kill. The study said the results raise questions about quality control in the stun gun's manufacturing and decline in performance over time.
The CBC News/Radio-Canada investigation is accessible online, as are the accompanying stories and source documents. A portion:
Pierre Savard, a biomedical engineer at the University of Montreal, designed the technical procedure for the CBC's testing based on Taser International's specifications.
Savard told CBC News it is scientifically significant that about nine percent of the Tasers fired in the tests delivered more current than they are supposed to do, especially since he believes no one is verifying the company's claims.
"I think it's important because Taser is not subjected to international standards," Savard said. "When you use a cellphone, well, cellphones have to respect a set of standards … for the electric magnetic field that it emits. The Taser, well, nobody knows except Taser International."
Savard said the cause of the increased current could be either due to faulty quality control during the stun guns' manufacturing or electrical components that deteriorate with age.
The findings are troubling, since police officers are trained to aim a Taser at the chest, said Savard, who studies heart rhythms and how they are affected by electrical stimulation.
"When you combine an increased current intensity with a dart that falls right over the heart for somebody who has cardiovascular disease or other conditions such as using drugs, for example, it can all add up to a fatal issue," Savard said.
The piece is the CBC's latest in their ongoing investigation into Tasers, which really took off after the October 2007 death of Robert Dziekanski, a Polish man who died after being shocked by police Tasers at Vancouver International Airport.
Canada's press has been leading the way in Taser coverage over the past year as interest in the U.S. has waned. This piece is the latest example of that.
Today is the deadline for international chemical companies to comply with a sweeping new European law requiring proof that products they export are safe. On Marketplace, CIR's Mark Schapiro talks about the law, which may force American companies to make safer chemicals. Under the new regulation, called REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals), the companies will have to pre-register their products—revealing detailed data about the chemical ingredients and their toxicity—before they are allowed to sell the products in Europe.
Will American chemical companies—who've resisted regulations at home that require giving up such information to consumers—clean up their act? Or will they simply stop selling certain products that don't meet the EU standards in Europe?
On the program, Schapiro points out:
If the United States does not keep up with what the European Union is doing now, what's going to happen is we are going to become the dumping ground for products that are banned in Europe.
The Overseas Press Club sent a letter to the California Attorney General in support of a re-investigation of Chauncey Bailey's murder:
November 17, 2008
Hon. Edmund G. Brown
Attorney General
California Department of Justice
P.O. Box 944255
Sacramento, CA 94244Attn: Public Inquiry Unit
Dear Mr. Attorney General:
The Overseas Press Club of America, a world-wide organization of six hundred international correspondents and editors, has been defending the rights of journalists around the world for nearly seven decades. It is rare that we find it necessary to speak out for freedom of the press in the United States. But the case of Chauncey Bailey, murdered editor of the Oakland Post, demands that we join the voices of so many others in calling for a fresh investigation of his murder. Now that you have agreed to open an investigation, as has the Alameda County District Attorney, we hope that this case can finally be resolved.
The Oakland police and the detective in charge of the investigation, Sargeant Longmire, have so muddled the investigation, shown favoritism and failed to bring out basic evidence that the case built up against Devaughndre Broussard seems unlikely to stand up in court. Sargeant Longmire had an association with Yusuf Bey IV, Broussard’s employer and head of the now-defunct, Your Black Muslim Bakery. Bey has a long criminal record and is now under arrest for a kidnapping. Within hours of the murder, Sgt. Longmire had decided to charge Broussard without bothering to follow up several important leads. Two years earlier, he had interfered on Bey’s behalf in two criminal investigations being conducted by other officers. Presumably, you are far more familiar with these and many other details than we are.
Our concern arises because a journalist has been silenced by murder. Bailey, as you know, had been investigating the Your Black Muslin Bakery. We note that Paul Cobb, publisher of the Post Newspaper Group, has since reported threats on his life. Some employees at the Oakland Post have quit for fear of violence, advertising is drying up and the paper itself may become a second victim of the assassination.
Murder is a common way of silencing journalists in some other countries but is fortunately rare in the United States. Chauncey Bailey’s case should not become an example of how to silence the press here. The mayor of Oakland has ordered a new investigation and at the same time requested your intervention. The mayor and others clearly believe, as we do, that this case should be investigated anew by an organization with the powers and prestige of your office.
We ask for the courtesy of an early reply.
Very truly yours,
Jeremy Main
Kevin McDermott
Freedom of the Press Committee
The Society for Visual Anthropology said Banished—a documentary co-produced by CIR about racial cleansings in small American towns—"has great anthropological value" and honored the film with an Award of Commendation.
From the SVA website:
From the first minutes of filmmaker Marco Williams’ Banished, viewers know that they are in the hands of a master storyteller. Williams’ multi-layered and complex story takes us into the cultural history of racial cleansing in the American South. The film focuses on the long forgotten banishment of African American families from several southern towns in the early 1900s. It takes us on an historical and emotional journey from yellowed newspaper clippings of the time to the present day descendants of the banished families and their struggle to gain recognition, justice and compensation for the land and possessions appropriated from their ancestors over a hundred years ago.
Banished never takes an easy or obvious turn. It refuses to reduce the issues to good and evil. Instead it subtly, carefully weighs the complexity of race, history, memory and the clouded path towards seeking reconciliation and justice for injustices of a distant past.
Marco Williams’ respectful on-camera probing results in surprisingly honest and emotional responses from allies and opponents alike. One’s allegiances keep shifting in viewing this film, making the questions it raises more critical and lasting than the answers, questions the audiences will be thinking about days, months, perhaps years after viewing.
Banished has great anthropological value. It reveals the structure of land holding African American families at the turn of the century and the consequences of their banishment and disenfranchisement on their descendants generations later. It also reveals much about the values of “black free” towns in the South today and the long shadows cast there by injustices of the past.
The game is over. Some won, some lost, and a lot of people laid down their money.
Scores of independent groups went into hyperdrive for this election, reaching millions of people with some of the most vicious attack ads of the year. We saw new groups pop up out of nowhere; we saw old groups go to unprecedented lengths to help their candidates of choice; and we saw organized labor, corporate America and the partisan wealthy flood them all with money. For the last few months, we've tracked their moves at the Secret Money Project. We hope our reporting helped illuminate the sometimes-opaque forces of influence, and serves as a resource in the future.
While independent groups mostly stayed a sidenote during the campaigns -- particularly the heavily financed presidential contest -- they did leave their marks.
But figuring out what impact the groups actually had on the campaigns is a tricky proposition. For one thing, the mish-mash of tax rules, campaign finance laws and Supreme Court decisions made it impossible to know precisely how much money they spent. We gave it a good try here, by adding together all the money that groups reported spending on election-related communications since July:
PRESIDENTIAL RACE
Conservative Groups: $40.9 million
Liberal Groups: $53.1 million
SENATE RACES
Conservative Groups: $40.4 million
Liberal Groups: $29.6 million
This is a vast undercount, since many groups only have to report election ads that show up on TV or radio or that explicitly say to vote for or against a candidate.We recorded $4.2 million for MoveOn.org, for example, while the group engaged in plenty of other activities and said in a press release that it spent more than $30 million overall.
Chalk it up to a system that, for better or worse, doesn't require vast amounts of election-related activity to be reported. Money, in any case, doesn't necessarily equal impact. Many organizations spent big on mobilizing their members and getting out the vote, and that counts for something.
But what about those attack ads? All ads and groups are measured nowadays against the standard of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the 2004 group that wounded Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry's aspirations. Nobody achieved Swift Boat status this year, though some tried hard, on the left (Brave New PAC) and right (National Republican Trust and American Issues Project).
Perhaps the media, which hyped the Swift Boat group in 2004, learned their lesson and avoided giving any attack too much credit, theorizes John Geer, an expert on negative advertising at Vanderbilt University. Tom Matzzie, a Democratic strategist, has his own diagnosis: that the Internet has made it too easy to fact-check dishonest ads. Conservative operative Chris LaCivita, who went from Swift Boat Veterans in 2004 to American Issues Project this year, says it was just money. He says AIP simply couldn't raise enough from big donors after Wall Street crashed.
And maybe attack groups never got a direct shot at a candidate's core message. The Swift Boat ads took aim at Kerry's war record, which he was running on. But this year, when the economy became the main issue for voters, attacks on Senator Obama's nefarious "associations" or McCain's health seemed less relevant.
Plus, Senator Obama buried McCain and his allies with the biggest pot of money ever spent on an election. "With Obama's fundraising advantage, all the 527s kinda got crowded out," Geer says. "We're going to go to a system where the next presidential candidates are both going to have to raise so much money...that all of the sudden these people who are funding these 527s have to think about whether it's worth putting their money down."
An interest group's goal is not only to help a candidate win, but also to ingratiate itself with the politician or party, says Steve Weissman, of the Campaign Finance Institute. Even if labor unions and such groups as MoveOn.org and Planned Parenthood didn't necessarily tip the election to Senator Obama, they dedicated a vast amount of money and resources to his cause, and now can hope that he feels indebted to them.
Let's take a look at who racked up some chits. (Click on the links to watch the groups' ads and read about their funding and leadership.)
PRESIDENTIAL RACE
**Liberal Groups**
1. SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION = $23,107,433
2. UNITED AUTO WORKERS = $4,860,571
3. MOVEON.ORG = $4,185,821
4. AFSCME = $2,312,723
5. PLANNED PARENTHOOD ACTION FUND = $2,096,495
6. ADVANCING WISCONSIN = $2,094,687
7. AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS = $1,997,375
8. PROGRESSIVE FUTURE = $1,496,323
9. SIERRA CLUB = $1,213,068
10. HEALTH CARE FOR AMERICA NOW = $1,132,085
11. NARAL PRO-CHOICE AMERICA = $1,117,991
12. DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE ACTION FUND = $1,021,241
**Conservative Groups**
1. NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION = $6,946,238
2. NATIONAL REPUBLICAN TRUST = $6,592,925
3. VETS FOR FREEDOM = $4,596,149
4. NATIONAL RIGHT TO LIFE = $4,504,422
5. LET FREEDOM RING = $3,257,939
6. AMERICAN ISSUES PROJECT = $2,878,873
7. REPUBLICAN MAJORITY CAMPAIGN = $1,851,120
8. FOCUS ON THE FAMILY ACTION = $1,332,862
9. RIGHTCHANGE.COM = $1,318,691
10. REPUBLICAN JEWISH COALITION = $1,267,002
11. COMMITTEE FOR TRUTH IN POLITICS = $1,192,510*
12. NATIONAL CAMPAIGN FUND = $1,167,810
*The total for the Committee for Truth in Politics is an estimate by the Campaign Media Analysis Group. The group argues in a pending lawsuit that it doesn't have to report its expenditures.
The biggest spenders on the left were obviously labor unions. George Soros -- who made himself a political lightning rod by bankrolling anti-Bush groups in 2004 -- in this cycle gave $3.5 million to Fund for America, $1 million to America Votes, about half a million to other liberal groups, and that's all that we know of. Hollywood producer Steve Bing also spent $2.5 million on the Fund for America, and about a million more on other pro-Democratic groups.
On the right, pharmaceutical executive Fred Eshelman apparently outspent Soros, dumping $5.5 million into his anti-Obama 527, RightChange.com. Other conservative megadonors include Texas businessman Harold Simmons, who gave $2.9 million to American Issues Project, and retired physician John Templeton Jr., who gave at least $2.7 million to Let Freedom Ring.
In contrast, a few conservative political action committees were able to raise remarkable sums via strictly regulated small donations. The National Republican Trust, for example, reported spending an incredible $6.6 million on the election, despite being founded in September.
Now, shifting to congressional races ...
We set out to cover Senate races, figuring that several contests could be pivotal to the chamber's makeup next year, while the House was clearly destined to become more Democratic. Outside groups saw it that way too, and piled into Senate contests as the election drew near. Weissman says independent groups focused more on congressional races than in 2004. In some of the closest contests, outside groups with huge warchests had the potential to make a significant difference, he says. (See our chart of groups below.)
And speaking of collecting chits, the pharmaceutical industry, under the guise of America's Agenda: Health Care for Kids, went so far as to spend millions on incumbents of both parties -- many of them in completely safe seats. Surely a good way to make friends in Congress.
A popular strategy on the left was funneling union money through independent 527s to produce attack ads. Unions produced their own ads, but they also provided almost all the funding for Patriot Majority to blitz key Senate races. Union money flowed to Citizens for Strength and Security, Majority Action, Campaign Money Watch -- all of them 527s that report their contributions.
On the right, this election cycle saw the creation of several new 501(c)(4) nonprofits, which don't have to disclose their donors, focusing on congressional races. High-powered examples include the Employee Freedom Action Committee and American Future Fund, as well as Coloradans for Economic Growth and American Energy Alliance. Freedom's Watch also fits the bill, though we know it's bankrolled by casino magnate Sheldon Adelson. Of course, Americans for Job Security has been doing this for years, and appears to be unfazed by a complaint to the Internal Revenue Service that it's violating its tax status.
Weissman, in a recent report on independent groups, points to the increasing popularity of 501(c)(4) advocacy groups and 501(c)(6) trade associations on the right and the left as a major trend of this election season.
"The impact," he tells us, "is that there's more ads out there that you don't quite know who's behind them."
That's why we started the Secret Money Project, to help shed some light on the groups trying to influence your vote. We hope it's proved enlightening.
-- Will Evans and Peter Overby
SENATE RACES
**Liberal Groups**
1. PATRIOT MAJORITY = $5,171,393
2. AMERICA'S AGENDA: HEALTH CARE FOR KIDS = $4,403,124
3. SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION = $2,662,464
4. CAMPAIGN MONEY WATCH = $2,357,409
5. AMERICAN RIGHTS AT WORK = $2,300,049
6. LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS = $1,626,664
7. NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION = $1,328,032
8. AFSCME = $1,291,950
9. CITIZENS FOR STRENGTH AND SECURITY = $1,163,352
10. ALLIANCE FOR A BETTER MINNESOTA = $1,077,453
11. MAJORITY ACTION = $1,025,276
12. PLANNED PARENTHOOD ACTION FUND = $1,016,052
**Conservative Groups**
1. U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE = $13,251,304
2. FREEDOM'S WATCH = $5,577,688
3. AMERICANS FOR JOB SECURITY = $5,279,833
4. EMPLOYEE FREEDOM ACTION COMMITTEE = $3,528,389*
5. AMERICAN FUTURE FUND = $1,610,238
6. NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS = $1,307,147
7. CLUB FOR GROWTH = $1,122,889
8. NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION = $1,079,801
9. AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION = $922,000
10. AMERICA'S AGENDA: HEALTH CARE FOR KIDS = $879,660
11. AMERICAN ENERGY ALLIANCE = $777,092
12. COLORADANS FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH = $670,562
*The Employee Freedom Action Committee's total is an estimate by the Campaign Media Analysis Group, since the group didn't have to file government reports on its expenditures. For example, the group ended its ad campaigns in Senate races just before the reporting requirements clicked in. Its ads after that didn't mention candidates by name, again avoiding filing requirements.
METHODOLOGY: We compiled our totals using Federal Election Commission filings by groups on their independent expenditures (messages explicitly advocating the election or defeat of a candidate) and electioneering communications (broadcast ads mentioning a candidate close to the election). Our starting date was July 1, the beginning of the first month after the presidential primaries ended. When an organization had an affiliated PAC, 527 and 501(c)(4), we added all the money together. We also combined the spending of unions and their locals, as well as national groups with their state affiliates. When a group reported one bulk expenditure for presidential, Senate and House ads, we tried to approximate the split. Our totals are certainly an undercount. Here are some reasons why: Massive voter mobilization efforts aren't counted. Some groups may have not reported independent expenditures, claiming they didn't expressly advocate for a candidate. Some other groups appeared to tailor their campaigns to avoid reporting requirements. Even with the numbers we do have, some groups filed inaccurate or incomplete reports. So don't take this as a full accounting, but rather a window into the world of independent groups, given the level of transparency that we currently have.
This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.
Computer systems and other equipment used by customs and border officials, the U.S. Coast Guard and transportation security personnel for homeland security operations at Los Angeles International Airport are vulnerable to theft and tampering, according to a report by the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security.
The report, heavily redacted for national-security reasons, noted that telecommunications equipment and servers used by the agencies are left unobserved and contain poorly protected passwords. It includes a photo of a wide-open door leading to a server room used by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The door is always left open because the room doesn't have a ventilation system sufficient enough to keep it cool, according to the report.
"Anyone entering the server room would have access to ICE back-up tapes, server, router, and switches because they are not stored in a locked cabinet," the IG found.
The access controls at an ICE field office in El Segundo, Calif., which assists with investigations of illegal exports, are weak, the report concluded, and employees have wide access to multiple files increasing "the risk of loss or theft of ICE mission-sensitive data."
"Unauthorized personnel may have the ability to write, alter, or delete data that reside on shared resources."
Also, according to the report, a data system maintained by the TSA is configured to allow anonymous access to one of its servers, meaning a hacker could log in without proper credentials. “Malicious code" could be placed on another of the TSA's systems containing shared data. The TSA also didn't have water sprinklers or fire extinguishers in a server room and telecommunications closet, while relying on a simple portable fan to keep the heat off IT equipment in a separate area.
Several federal agencies adopted the use of new databases after 9/11 containing detailed personal information about Americans and foreigners, the idea being that the more they knew about national and international travelers, the likelier authorities would be able to spot a rogue airline passenger before he or she struck. But the portions of the report made public last week don't reveal which systems used by the Coast Guard, the Transportation Security Administration, ICE and others are susceptible to a cyber assault.
The report points to an incident last year in which customs officials suffered a major network outage at LAX, one of the world’s largest airports, that stalled operations for hours and disrupted the travel plans of 17,000 passengers. The airport's terminals filled with travelers waiting to be processed, others were forced to remain sitting on airliners for hours following international flights and some planes had to be redirected to other airports.
An aging IT infrastructure at the airport exacerbated the outage. According to the Los Angeles Times, airport employees had to distribute food, water and baby diapers to stranded passengers and refuel planes to keep their air conditioning systems running. Inspectors say that another agency, Customs and Border Protection, has installed new hardware since then to prevent a recurrence.
But additional problems remain. In November of 2006, customs authorities installed a high-speed connection for wireless Internet access at LAX, but a year later federal agents who were supposed to be able to use the system to better communicate couldn't to do so because of technical problems. No one interviewed by the inspector general could say whether it had ever been used. A room containing IT equipment for use by CBP personnel had shoddy electrical wiring, missing ceiling tiles and dust.
The IG's conclusions were released on the same day that a group of security consultants from one of the world's most tightly controlled airports near Tel Aviv announced they’d completed an assessment of LAX. Past reports by the team haven't been made public, but according to a Contra Costa Times story about the most recent review, the airport has made "significant progress" since 2006, implying that safety measures weren't strong previously.
It's not clear if the release of that news, with its improved outlook on security at LAX, was intended to coincide with the inspector general's less sanguine report.