[Capr-announce] FW: ACTION NEEDED: Opposition Buys UW "Study"

[Rodney McFarland]

  _____  

From: Dan Wood [mailto:dwood at wsfb.com] 
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 7:15 PM
To: rod at sage1.com
Subject: ACTION NEEDED: Opposition Buys UW "Study"

 

Please forward to all lists!

 

To:     Yes on I-933 Grassroots Leaders & Supporters

 

Fr:      Dan Wood

 

Re:    UW to Release Anti-933 Study Tomorrow

         

 

RIGHT TO THE POINT:

 

Action Step #1.  SEND LETTERS TO NEWSPAPERS.

 

Write to local and regional newspapers today and tell them what you think
about this bogus study that was bought and paid for by the opposition to the
Property Fairness Initiative. Here are some thoughts:

*	The foundations sponsoring this study are run by the same super-rich
backers funding the opposition to the Property Fairness Initiative.  They
want to buy the election, and buying credibility from the UW is part of
their strategy.
*	These millionaire and billionaire activists live by difference rules
than the rest of us.  They build their mega-mansions on the waterfront and
use their property in ways that regular people cannot.  Then they contribute
hundreds of thousands of dollars (pocket change for them) to organizations
that want more government control over the rest of us.
*	The opposition is using taxpayer resources (the University) for
political campaign purposes.  It's flat out wrong, just like state agencies
and local governments have spent taxpayer resources to campaign against
I-933, which will hold them accountable for the cost and affect of their
unfair regulations.
*	This is the same campaign tactic as last time.  Use taxpayer
resources and opposition funding to try to convince voters that there is
legitimacy to the opposition message.  We won't buy it this time.  Fool me
once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.
*	When the same people, led by the same person (Glen Pascall) did this
before, they were discredited as "bordering on fraud."  Taxpayer resources
should not be used for fraudulent political campaign messages.
*	Visit PropertyFairness.com to read the initiative for yourselves.
*	In Oregon, not a dime has been paid in compensation, yet that does
not show up in this so-called "study."  The result in Oregon is that
government is considering the cost of their actions and working with
property owners.  We should have the same fair treatment in our state.

 

Action Step 2: Contribute. 

We need to have the funding to run our own advertising.  Polling shows that
we will win if we get our message out.  Please go to
www.PropertyFairness.com <http://www.propertyfairness.com/>  today to make a
contribution to the campaign.

 

The University of Washington "study" on I-933 will be released at a news
conference tomorrow (Tuesday, September 26) at 10:30.

 

You can expect it to repeat the same rhetoric and distortions that we've
seen from the opposition campaign - after all, the opposition paid for it.

 

The opposition is into staging events to try to buy credibility.

 

Just look at the "farmer" TV ad they're running (which will be answered
soon, be assured).

 

Does a real farmer have a hillside of observers, a helicopter flying
overhead, a camera crew filming every move?  Does anyone really believe
there is a connection between a wheat field in the Palouse and a field in
Skagit County?

 

It's all staged by environmental activists and their millionaire/billionaire
backers who want to create an image and credibility that only money can buy.

 

. but I digress . back to the "study."

 

Last week, we filed a public records request demanding that the University
come clean with documents relating to this study.  We have received no
response to our request for records.  Failure to respond will be yet another
violation of state law.

 

You can read about the request and the bogus study below.

 

Please, when you are done reading, send a letter to your local paper and
visit www.PropertyFairness.com <http://www.propertyfairness.com/>  to make a
generous contribution.

 

And, remember to forward this message to your lists.

 

Our grassroots campaign can beat back their attempt to buy this election.

 

Farm Bureau Demands Documents from University

"Study" Funded by Opposition Groups

OLYMPIA - Washington Farm Bureau today filed a public records request with
the University of Washington, asking for public records related to a planned
"study" on Initiative 933.

"We want them to reveal who is behind the study, who is directing the study,
and what the connections are with the special interests that are funding the
anti-fairness campaign," said Dan Wood, government relations director for
Washington Farm Bureau.

"This study is paid for by the same environmental extremist organizations
that are backing the campaign against the Property Fairness Initiative,"
said Wood. "They are trying to buy credibility from the University and they
are using public resources to do it."

Because the University of Washington is a state agency, it is required to
provide public documents, whether on paper or in electronic form, under the
state Public Records Act (RCW 42.56).

"It's an abuse of public trust for any agency to engage in these types of
campaign activities," Wood said. "Under the law, they will need to come
clean with the connections to the anti-fairness campaign and they will need
to show who is buying this so-called study."

The Northwest Center for Livable Communities, a division of the University,
is coordinating the study on behalf of the Bullitt Foundation, Brainerd
Foundation, Wilburforce Foundation and others.

These same foundations funded a University of Washington "study" in 1995,
released lat in the Fall campaign.  In that year, a similar measure,
Referendum 48, sought to address excessive regulations that treated property
owners unfairly.

Wood said the late release of the so-called study was a death blow to the
referendum, and that opponents hope to repeat the scenario in 2006.

"They're planning another 'October Surprise' for this year," said Wood. 

"This time, the voters aren't going to be taken in by their tactics."

In 1995, the University of Washington administration sent two letters to the
anti-property rights campaign, telling them to "immediately refrain from the
use of the phrase 'University of Washington'" in their ads against
referendum 48.  

In similar communication, University Associate Vice President Norman Arkans
told the No on 48 campaign that their "wording is misleading in that it
suggests that the University commissioned the study when it was paid for by
private foundation grants."

An earlier letter from Arkans told the campaign that, "under state law, the
University may not be involved in any way in the promotion of or opposition
to a ballot proposition." He concluded by telling the campaign that "you are
not authorized to use the University of Washington name, trademarks, symbols
or logos in any material opposing ballot proposition 48."

"We hope the University still holds the same values of abiding by the law
and not being used for political purposes," said Wood.

The purchased study in 1995, led by Glenn Pascall, was met with harsh
criticism.

The Washington Institute for Policy Studies, which included Pascall on its
board of advisors, wrote to Pascall and told him that the study "leaves us
with grave concern."

Cost estimates were based upon "pure analytical fabrication" and the study
contained "rhetoric and conjecture without any supportive analysis."

Meanwhile, the Washington Research Council labeled the study as "bordering
on fraud" and pointed out that there was no peer review of the 1995 study.

"This is an example of academic opinions for sale," said Wood. "Voters were
fooled once by this tactic, but they won't be fooled again."

"Unfortunately, the University's credibility will be the biggest price paid
for this study.  But the anti-fairness campaign is only concerned about
buying a campaign message."

"We're looking forward to the University complying with the public
disclosure law and coming clean about who is buying the study," said Wood




 

 

WHO ARE THE MAIN CONTRIBUTORS FOR THE CAMPAIGN OPPOSING I-933?

 

Big surprise.  A bunch of super-rich Seattle elitists who think they know
better than you how you should use your land.  People like Bill Gates, Paul
Allen, Harriet Bullitt and a group called Futurewise.

 

Future-who?  They used to be "1000 Friends of Washington" but after the
public started figuring out who they are they changed their name.  After the
Growth Management Act was rejected by voters it was 1000 Friends who
convinced the legislature to pass it anyway and got the governor to sign it.


 

You  might think that Gates doesn't believe in property rights.  

 

But he does.  

 

Boy does he.  

 

Just not yours.   

 

There are two recent issues with Microsoft that demonstrate that Gates is
certainly for property rights. 

 

1.	When MS products were being illegally copied, packaged and sold
overseas he was justly upset that he was not being paid for the pirated
copies.

 

2.	Gates also complained when courts were threatening to require him to
reveal a segment of the Windows code so other software makers could more
easily meld their internet browser with Windows.  He won.  

 

It would have been a unique form of justice had Mr. Gates been told: "Look,
Mr. Gates, we're not taking all of your program, just a part of it.  You get
to use the rest of it."

Few can match Bill Gates wealth.  The $50,000 he has already given to the No
campaign is but pocket change to him.  We need you, our grassroots leaders
to spread this message far and wide.  

 

And we need you to contribute to the Property Fairness Coalition right now.
Go to www.propertyfairness.com <http://www.propertyfairness.com/>  to make a
generous contribution.  If you prefer to send a check the address is

 

Property Fairness Coalition

P. O. Box 2446

Olympia, WA 98507

 

 

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.celestial.com/pipermail/capr-announce/attachments/20060925/8c441b2d/attachment-0001.html