Zur Navigation | Zum Inhalt
     
 
Hispanics at the Polls
User Rating: / 1
TAE Articles and Commentary - TAE Commentary and Articles
Written by Alvaro Vargas Llosa   
Wednesday, 12 November 2008

Hispanics at the Polls 
November 2008 - The Abolitionist Examiner
Alvaro Vargas Llosa

WASHINGTON—Because of the debate over immigration reform, the word “Hispanic” became a stigma in the eyes of many Americans over the last two years. How ironic then that 10 million Hispanic voters played such a crucial role in last week’s presidential election. They voted for Barack Obama by a 2-1 margin, giving him a decisive push in four states—Florida, Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico—that he wrested back from the GOP.

Hispanics have tended to side with the Democrats, but never by this large of a margin. According to 2004 exit polls, President Bush obtained 44 percent of the Hispanic vote in his re-election bid. One would think that by almost any measure—upward social mobility, church attendance, marriage patterns—Hispanics would be a dream electoral target for a party that champions enterprise, self-reliance and family values.

But the GOP this year did not seem interested. Even in the wake of the immigration debate, Latinos hardly organized in any meaningful way to fight back—except for those May Day demonstrations in 2006 and 2007. There was nothing predetermined in their support of Obama—as the Democratic primaries clearly showed. And yet, even accounting for the fact that Hispanics, like many other demographic groups, wanted to punish the current administration and were eventually seduced by the candidate who courted them intensely, the shift in their vote is astounding. It is as if the relentless anti-immigration voice on the right managed to turn millions of Hispanics who were not illegal immigrants into a community-conscious force acting in fear of a perceived threat. This fear even produced the irony of California Hispanics voting for the center-left of the political spectrum in the general election while siding with the right on social issues, as shown by their vote against Proposition 8—the anti-gay marriage initiative.

Politicians will now begin to look closely at some important trends among Hispanics. I don’t mean the obvious fact that they represent 15 percent of the population and by the year 2050 will probably make up one-quarter of the nation. Almost 4 million Hispanics—nearly one in 10—are financially well-off, according to the U.S. Census, and about 40 percent are middle class. This is a not a small achievement for people whose beginnings are, for the most part, quite humble. Treating them as alien to the mainstream American experience and culture is an act of political suicide.

This past year took care of some of the myths that emerged during the immigration debate. The number of illegal immigrants coming into the U.S. has dropped by about half, in no small measure due to market conditions -- which is the way immigrant flows usually work. When they are in high demand, they come in flocks. When demand goes down—as has been the case in agriculture, construction and other industries—they stay home. If the welfare state—free public education, access to health care—were the main attraction, the flow would not change so dramatically from one year to the next. Which is not to say that migrants who want to live off the rest of society are not imposing an unacceptable toll on it. But that is ultimately a case for profoundly revising the welfare state, not for stigmatizing all immigrants.

In the last four decades, the anti-immigration cause has gone from being championed by the left to being mostly championed by the right. There used to be a guest-worker program called “bracero” in the United States. It was instituted in 1942 but killed in the 1960s because of labor union objections. That is quite fitting, since unions tend to act as protectionist guilds that fear competition and people whom they do not control. Cesar Chavez, the famed Hispanic union leader, himself opposed that guest-worker program.

It is time to move beyond hysteria and start to look at Hispanics with a more open mind. In a radio address given in 1977, Ronald Reagan mocked “the illegal alien fuss,” asking himself: “Are great numbers of our unemployed really victims of the illegal alien invasion, or are those illegal tourists actually doing work our own people won’t do?” If only in the interest of political survival, those who claim to idolize the Gipper—the same guy who in 1986 legalized almost 3 million Hispanics, many of whom were driven by fear to vote for Obama—should think again.


Alvaro Vargas Llosa
Send email

Alvaro Vargas Llosa
 is Senior Fellow of The Center on Global Prosperity at The Independent Institute. He is a native of Peru and received his B.S.C. in international history from the London School of Economics. His weekly column is syndicated worldwide by the Washington Post Writers Group, and his Independent Institute books include Lessons From the Poor: Triumph of the Entrepreneurial Spirit, The Che Guevara Myth: And the Future of Liberty, and Liberty for Latin America. 

Full Biography and Recent Publications


CheNew from Alvaro Vargas Llosa!
The Che Guevara Myth and the Future of Liberty

Nearly four decades after his death, the legend of Che Guevara has grown worldwide. In this new book, Alvaro Vargas Llosa separates myth from reality and shows that Che’s ideals re-hashed centralized power—long the major source of suffering and misery for the poor.Learn More »»

 

Be first to comment this article | Add as favourites (195) | Quote this article on your site | Views: 3941

Last Updated ( Thursday, 13 November 2008 )
 
The Obama Coalition
User Rating: / 1
TMA Articles and Commentary - TMA Commentary and Essays
Written by Alvaro Vargas Llosa   
Wednesday, 05 November 2008

The Obama Coalition 
November 2008 - The Multiracial Activist
Alvaro Vargas Llosa

WASHINGTON—The social coalition put together by Barack Obama signifies a political realignment that may well have replaced the one that started with Richard Nixon, reached its zenith with Ronald Reagan and appears to have expired with George W. Bush. Whether Obama’s coalition is long-lasting or ephemeral will depend on how he himself interprets it. The consensus seems to be that Obama’s diverse supporters, as Harold Meyerson recently put it in The Washington Post, expect their leader to “implement a 21st-century version of Franklin Roosevelt’s reforms.” I am not so sure.

The Obama coalition is made up of minorities, white professionals, students and a substantial number of white middle-class voters, especially women.

Minorities backed Obama in staggeringly high numbers. It follows that, in the case of blacks, the coalition includes a significant number of middle-class African-Americans with scant connection to Lyndon Johnson’s minority-oriented welfare programs; in the case of Hispanics, it includes many of those conservative-leaning Latinos who voted for George W. Bush in 2004 but were recently alienated by the GOP’s immigration phobia.

There is no reason to believe that white professionals who voted for Obama are in favor of European-style socialism either. Most of them hold jobs in industries that already are highly regulated and taxed. Theirs is probably a reaction against the anti-intellectual populism of the wing of the Republican Party that dictated government policy in recent years and against the excessive intrusion of religion into politics, particularly regarding social issues.

Finally, that Obama was able to draw such a big portion of the white middle-class vote, particularly “Wal-Mart moms,” indicates that a longing for economic security was a driving force of the Democrat’s success—a sentiment that cuts across all the groups that make up the coalition.

Just like in 1932, when Roosevelt defeated Herbert Hoover, many of Obama’s voters feel that the government failed to protect them in the face of uncertainty. The instinct for government protection—from competition abroad, from the loss of real estate value and from the perils of old age at a time when the Social Security entitlement seems in peril—is strong in today’s America. But this fear has existed for quite some time, and for many months it was not enough to give Obama a commanding lead against John McCain—until the financial crisis hit home.

Once it did, many new voters seem to have flocked to Obama’s coalition out of a combination of disgust at the Bush administration and fear of the future—all of which made them more comfortable with the Democrat’s proposals that a few weeks earlier were meeting with a great deal of skepticism. It is safe to assume that even among Obama’s voters, then, there is still an undercurrent of healthy distrust in the notion that European-style socialism is a solution to America’s recession and difficult adaptation to today’s global society—a reason, incidentally, why Obama himself kept talking about “better” rather than “bigger” government.

Government has been growing at a rate of over 13 percent a year, the national debt has doubled in the last eight years and the fiscal deficit is approaching $500 billion. Add to those fundamental imbalances the policies of easy money implemented by the Federal Reserve and of encouraging lenders to hand out loans to people who could not pay them and you get a pretty good sense of where the origin of today’s economic problems lies.

Obama will need to bear all of this in mind in the years ahead as he comes under pressure from some factions of the Democratic Party hoping to translate his mandate into a Rooseveltian expansion of government. Such an expansion would severely undermine America’s ability to compete in the global marketplace, and the impressive coalition that he has put together would not last his administration.

During the course of his campaign, Obama was able to win the respect, and in some cases the endorsement, of a number of free-market conservatives who are rebelling against what they see as the populist, insular mentality of the dominant wing of the GOP. Most of them indicated that they saw in Obama’s cool judgment, his self-made success, and his distrust of identity politics someone who would not succumb to the siren song of his own party’s socialist wing. Let us hope that this is so.


Alvaro Vargas Llosa
Send email

Alvaro Vargas Llosa
 is Senior Fellow of The Center on Global Prosperity at The Independent Institute. He is a native of Peru and received his B.S.C. in international history from the London School of Economics. His weekly column is syndicated worldwide by the Washington Post Writers Group, and his Independent Institute books include Lessons From the Poor: Triumph of the Entrepreneurial Spirit, The Che Guevara Myth: And the Future of Liberty, and Liberty for Latin America. 

Full Biography and Recent Publications

New from Alvaro Vargas Llosa!
The Che Guevara Myth and the Future of Liberty

Nearly four decades after his death, the legend of Che Guevara has grown worldwide. In this new book, Alvaro Vargas Llosa separates myth from reality and shows that Che’s ideals re-hashed centralized power—long the major source of suffering and misery for the poor. Learn More »»

Be first to comment this article | Add as favourites (217) | Quote this article on your site | Views: 4034

Last Updated ( Wednesday, 07 October 2009 )
 
27 Groups Oppose Bailout in Letter to U.S. Senate
User Rating: / 0
Advocacy and Letters - Letters to Government Agencies Signed by TMA
Written by Coalition   
Wednesday, 01 October 2008

October 01, 2008

An Open Letter to the United States Senate: 27 Groups Urge You to Oppose the $700 Billion Bailout!

Dear Senator:

On behalf of the millions of citizens and taxpayers represented by our organizations, we strongly urge you to vote against the financial industry bailout package that will soon be before you.

This unconscionable scheme forces the vast majority of taxpayers who were honest and prudent to bail out firms that made bad business decisions. Furthermore, it does nothing to address the root causes of today's market difficulties. The long-term effects of this fiasco, including inflation, a weaker dollar, and an even more precarious federal balance sheet, are almost certain to outweigh the shallow short-term stabilization of moneyed interests who have been twisting arms on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.

Some in Congress have apparently decided to listen to a few political heavy-hitters in the financial community about the need to shovel boatloads of taxpayer money into their faltering businesses, rather than listening to their constituents who oppose this giveaway almost unanimously. The legislation before you has made nips and tucks to the Treasury's original proposal that ultimately cannot conceal its fundamental flaws.

Congress helped to create this debacle with the Community Reinvestment Act, poor tax policies, hastily designed mark-to-market regulations, and spectacular negligence with regard to the systemic risks posed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Instead of comprehensively addressing those core problems, this disgraceful plan snatches $700 billion from the pockets of hard-working Americans who largely had no part in this horrific play.

It would be naïve to suggest there are no problems that need rectifying in today's financial markets. However, it is equally naïve to think that elected officials and bureaucrats can solve those problems if only we write them a large enough check. There are pro-growth, free-market solutions to our challenges that would not put taxpayers on the hook. Congress would have been wise to pursue them instead of the short-sighted scheme that has been handed down to you. We urge you to vote against this bailout.

Sincerely,

Duane Parde
National Taxpayers Union

Ryan Ellis
American Shareholders Association

Dr. Jane Orient
Association of American Physicians and Surgeons

John Tate
Campaign for Liberty

Sandra Fabry
Center for Fiscal Accountability

Andrew F. Quinlan
Center for Freedom and Prosperity

Doug Bandow
Citizen Outreach Project

Matthew J. Brouillette
Commonwealth Foundation for Public Policy Alternatives (PA)

Nic Lott
Congress of Racial Equality (MS Chapter)

Michael B. Illions and Richard Ross
Conservatives with Attitude!

Thomas Schatz
Council for Citizens Against Government Waste

John Hallman
Florida Taxpayers Union

Matt Kibbe
FreedomWorks

Richard Falknor
Maryland Center-Right Coalition

Howie Morgan
Mississippi Forward

Jim Gilchrist
Minuteman Project

Thomas Martz
Missouri Liberty Coalition

James Landrith
The Multiracial Activist

Jerry Cantrell
New Jersey Taxpayers Association

William Westmiller
Republican Liberty Caucus

John Hawkins
Right Wing News

Lori Klein
Taxpayer Protection Alliance (AZ)

John K. Roberts
Taxpayers Union of Louisiana

Ben Cunningham
Tennessee Tax Revolt

Dane von Breichenruchardt
U.S. Bill of Rights Foundation

Rose Bogaert
Wayne County Taxpayers Association (MI)

Jeff Frazee
Young Americans for Liberty

This letter is available in PDF.

Be first to comment this article | Add as favourites (214) | Quote this article on your site | Views: 3280

 
Coalition Letter to Senate Banking on Bailout
User Rating: / 0
Advocacy and Letters - Letters to Government Agencies Signed by TMA
Written by Coalition   
Tuesday, 23 September 2008

September 23, 2008

 

Any Federal Financial Industry Rescue Package Must Be Transparent

 

The Honorable Christopher J. Dodd
Chairman
Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs

534 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

The Honorable Richard Shelby
Ranking Member

Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs

534 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

 

Dear Chairman Dodd and Ranking Member Shelby:

We the undersigned, as advocates for open and transparent government, strongly oppose section 2(b)(2) and section 8 of the Legislative Proposal for Treasury Authority to Purchase Mortgage-Related Assets. While we hold many different views on the causes of and remedies for the current turmoil in financial markets, we are united in the belief that the legislation confers unacceptably broad powers upon the Treasury to conduct activities without transparency and accountability to the public. As written, the proposal would make any decisions by the Secretary non-reviewable by courts or administrative agencies – a certain prescription for the very kind of opacity that has contributed to the financial policy woes we face today. Equally troubling, public contracts associated with the proposal could be created outside of existing laws normally governing such actions.


Few proposals in the 110th Congress can match this one for its impact on the American people. For the sake of democratic discourse, citizens deserve vigorous, timely, and accessible disclosure of all details surrounding any government decisions in response to financial market problems. Congress should respect this vital civil right by rejecting section 2(b)(2) and section 8 of the proposal now before you.


At a minimum, any credible solution must address one of the current crisis’ fundamental causes – corruption and other abuses of power sustained by secrecy. Otherwise, the taxpayers could end up giving $700 billion more to repeat the same disasters. Congress must prove it has learned this lesson. Any genuine solution must be grounded in transparency, with all relevant records publicly available and best practice whistleblower protection for all employees connected with the new law. Secrecy worsened this crisis, and taxpayers will not accept a law for secret solutions. What happens to our money is our business.


Thank you for your attention to this important matter. If you have any questions, please contact Patrice McDermott, OpenTheGovernment.org, at 202 332 6736, or Pete Sepp, National Taxpayers Union, at 703-683-5700.


Sincerely,

Access Info Europe

Allied Daily Newspapers of Washington

American Association of University Professors

American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression

American Civil Liberties Union

American Library Association

American Policy Center

Association of Research Libraries

Californians Aware

Center for Financial Privacy and Human Rights

Citizen Outreach Project

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

Common Cause

Defending Dissent Foundation

Downsize DC

Essential Information

FreedomWorks

Fund for Constitutional Government

Government Accountability Project

International Association of Whistleblowers

Liberty Coalition

Minnesota Coalition on Open Government

The Multiracial Activist

National Coalition Against Censorship

National Freedom of Information Coalition

National Taxpayers Union

National Whistleblower Center

9/11 Research Project

OMB Watch

OpenTheGovernment.org

Project on Government Oversight

Public Citizen

Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press

Scientific Integrity Program, Union of Concerned Scientists

Semmelweis Society International

Society of Professional Journalists

Special Libraries Association

Taxpayers for Common Sense

U.S. Bill of Rights Foundation

Washington Coalition for Open Government

Washington Newspaper Publishers Association

WhyCongressCantRead.com

Woodhull Freedom Foundation

Scott T. Edmondson, AICP, President, Sustainability 2030, San Francisco, California

Richard A. Knee, Freelance Journalist, San Francisco, CA

Ann Garrison, San Francisco, CA

Vicki Leidner, Real Estate Agent, San Francisco, CA

Daniel Macchiarini, California

Susan Nevelow Mart, UC Hastings College of the Law (affiliation for information only)

Chad Scherr, FOI Advocate West New York, NJ

Harrison Sheppard, Attorney, San Francisco, CA

Dr. Laurence H. Shoup, Oakland, CA

Marie J. Summers, Textile Artist, San Francisco, California

Paul Wertz, Journalist, retired. Eugene, OR

Be first to comment this article | Add as favourites (1) | Quote this article on your site | Views: 8

Last Updated ( Saturday, 28 August 2010 )
 
Whistleblower Letter to House and Senate Conferees
User Rating: / 0
Advocacy and Letters - Letters to Government Agencies Signed by TMA
Written by Coalition   
Wednesday, 16 July 2008

July 16, 2008

Dear Conferees,

Last October, 42 citizen, consumer and good government organizations signed a letter urging the Senate to support whistleblower protection in S. 2045, the CPSC Reform Act of 2007. Despite intense industry opposition, the Senate respected this mandate. With bi-partisan agreement the Senate adopted a strong whistleblower provision for enforcement of the law’s stronger consumer protection standards.

There no longer are any credible objections to the Senate provision. To illustrate, last fall industry lobbyists insisted that protection was unnecessary, because there were no reported cases of retaliation. Reform proponents pointed out the obvious: that was largely unavoidable due to the absence of legal rights. Nonetheless, proponents presented a menu of cases from whistleblowers who filed suit even without rights. Among others, the examples included a quality control manager fired for challenging inferior materials in an infant stationery play center; a product designer fired for challenging light fixtures that flunked federal safety standards but were marketed without prior testing; a product engineer fired after challenging continued sales without corrective action of faulty home furnace ignition devices that already had caused a fire; and a wire company employee fired for reporting shipment of faulty wiring in smoke alarms. Similarly, industry lobbyists asserted a deluge of litigation would ensue, but the allegation had no credibility. It has been made for virtually every whistleblower shield enacted by Congress, and never has materialized to date in 36 preexisting whistleblower laws

After the attacks could not stand scrutiny, special interest opponents largely stopped making them, in public.  We understand, however, that the pace of lobbying has intensified behind closed doors. It would be most unfortunate if this tactic worked. For one reason, the voters do not support it. A Democracy Corps survey of likely voters after the last election found whistleblower rights their second highest priority, chosen by 79%, only second to the related goal picked by 81% of ending illegal government spending.

That is understandable. Voters recognize that whistleblowers are the public’s eyes and ears. As illustrated above, whistleblowers have confirmed repeated instances of companies refusing to disclose the full extent of adverse internal tests results to the government, or to institute recalls despite test results that confirmed a high likelihood of fatal injuries.

Last week an anonymous whistleblower contacted the Union of Concerned Scientists and the Government Accountability Project to urge that the final CPSC legislation contain whistleblower protection. The employee’s experience is a microcosm of why that provision is, in the whistleblower’s words, “indispensable” for companies to take the new standards seriously for any products self-regulated through internal testing. Otherwise, the conflicts of interest are too severe and the certain costs too great to delay production at the stage when testing normally occurs.” That scenario is the rule, rather than the exception, for the 15,000 products covered by H.R. 4040/S 2045. GAP reports that the employee’s concerns are being distributed to conferee staff whose offices pledge to respect confidentiality even for a highly sanitized memorandum of concerns – the only conditions the employee would accept without rights.

The lesson to be learned is unavoidable. Even with greater resources, the CPSC cannot always enforce stronger safety standards unless employees have the legally-protected right to help enforce the law. In 2005 the House respected that principle by enacting “best practice” whistleblower rights in the Energy Policy Act. Last August, Congress proved it was serious about homeland security by passing best practice whistleblower rights for ground transportation employees. In January, Congress followed suit for defense contractors, despite the shrill objections from such powerful firms as Halliburton and Bechtel.

It would be unfortunate if Congress did not stand up to industry lobbyists on this bill who no longer can make their objections in public. America routinely depends on retail products that if defective could threaten our families many times every day. We urge you to protect those who are indispensable to enforce this law. It is unrealistic to expect that whistleblowers will defend the public if they can’t defend themselves. 

Gil Mileikowsky, M.D.

Alliance for Patient Safety

 

Mary Alice Baish, Acting Washington Affairs Representative

American Association of Law Libraries

 

F. Patricia Callahan, president and general counsel

American Association of Small Property Owners

 

Nancy Talanian, Director

Bill of Rights Defense Committee

 

Charlie Cray, Director

Center for Corporate Policy

 

Merrill Goozner

Director, Integrity in Science

Center for Science in the Public Interest

 

Linda Lazarus, Director

Center to Advance Human Potential

 

Evelyn M. Hurwich, President and Chair

Circumpolar Conservation Union

 

John Judge

Coalition on Political Assassinations

9/11 Research Project

 

Matthew Fogg, President

Congress Against Racism & Corruption in Law Enforcement (CARCLE)

 

Ellen Bloom, Director of Federal Policy

Ami Gadhia, Policy Counsel

Consumers Union

 

Sue Udry, Director

Defending Dissent Foundation

 

Ben Smilowitz, Director

Disaster Accountability Project

 

Dr. Jim Murtagh

Doctors for Open Government

 

Gregory Hile

EnviroJustice

 

John Richard

Essential Information

 

George Anderson

Ethics in Government Group (EGG)

 

Steven Aftergood, Project Director

Federation of American Scientists

 

Marilyn Fitterman, Vice President

Feminists For Free Expression

 

Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director

Food and Water Watch

 

Conrad Martin, Executive Director

Fund for Constitutional Government

 

Gwen Marshall, co-Chairman

Georgians for Open Government

 

Tom Devine, Legal Director

Government Accountability Project

 

James C. Turner, Executive Director

HALT, Inc. -- An Organization of Americans for Legal Reform

 

Tom Carpenter, Executive Director

Hanford Challenge

 

Helen Salisbury, M.D.

Health Integrity Project

 

Rich Carlson , Legal Counsel

Idaho Rural Council

 

Michael McCray, Esq., Co-Chair

International Association of Whistleblowers

 

Donald Soeken, President

Integrity International

 

Mory Atashkar, Vice President

Iranian American Democratic Association

 

Mark S. Zaid

James Madison Project

 

Nancy Cowles, Executive Director

Kids in Danger

 

Michael D. Ostrolenk, National Director

Liberty Coalition

 

James Landrith, Founder

The Multiracial Activist

 

Joan E. Bertin, Esq., Executive Director

National Coalition Against Censorship

 

Sally Greenberg, Executive Director

National Consumers League

 

Terisa E. Chaw, Executive Director

National Employment Lawyers Association

 

Paul Brown, Government Relations Manager

National Research Center for Women & Families

 

Steve Kohn, President

National Whistleblower Center

 

Amy Allina

National Women's Health Network

 

Ron Marshall, Chairman

The New Grady Coalition

 

Rick Engler, Director

New Jersey Work Environment Council

 

Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, Chair

No FEAR Coalition

 

Sean Moulton, Director, Federal Information Policy

OMB Watch

 

Patrice McDermott, Executive Director

OpenTheGovernment.org

 

Joe Carson, PE, Chair

OSC Watch Steering Committee

 

Judy Norsigian, Executive Director

Our Bodies Ourselves

 

Betsy Combier, President and Editor

Parentadvocates.org

 

Former Special Agent Darlene Fitzgerald

Patrick Henry Center

 

Ronald J Riley, President

Professional Inventor's Alliance

 

Danielle Brian, Executive Director

Project On Government Oversight

 

David Arkush, Director, Congress Watch

Public Citizen

 

Jeff Ruch, Executive Director

Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility

 

John W. Whitehead, president

The Rutherford Institute

 

Dr. Roland Chalifoux

The Semmelweis Society International (SSI)

 

Clint Brewer, President

Society of Professional Journalists

 

Kevin Kuritzky

The Student Health Integrity Project (SHIP)

 

Daphne Wysham, Co-Director

Sustainable Energy and Economy Network (SEEN)

 

Jeb White, Executive Director

Taxpayers Against Fraud

 

Ken Paff, National Organizer

Teamsters for a Democratic Union

 

Paul Taylor

Truckers Justice Center

 

Francesca Grifo, Ph.D., Director

Scientific Integrity Program

Union of Concerned Scientists

 

Michael J. Wilson, International Vice President and Director,

Legislative and Political Action Department

United Food & Commercial Workers International Union

 

Dane von Breichenruchardt, President

U.S. Bill of Rights Foundation

 

Mabel Dobbs, Chair

Livestock Committee

Western Organization of Resource Councils

 

Janet Chandler, Co-Founder

Whistleblower Mentoring Project

 

Linda Lewis, Director

Whistleblowers USA

 

Kim Witczak

WoodyMatters

Be first to comment this article | Add as favourites (329) | Quote this article on your site | Views: 4409

 
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>

Results 31 - 35 of 683
 
     
Free Joomla! Templates provided by funky-visions.de
Template modding by Sven Brier