Friday, May 30, 2008

"Spygate" Fiasco Continues


Senator Arlen Specter continues to put government pressure on the NFL and urges a full-scale investigation similar to that of the Mitchell Report. Although the NFL has satisfactorily dealt with the problem, Senator Specter continues to grandstand for the news cameras in an attempt to woo Philadelphia supporters who were upset about the Patriots' loss in the Superbowl as well as represent the interests of Comcast, Senator Specter's third great contributory force since 1989, who is upset with the NFL because of the NFL's cable networking.


By Christopher L. Gasper, Globe Staff

WASHINGTON - After NFL commissioner Roger Goodell spoke with Matt Walsh Tuesday, the league appeared ready to close the book on "Spygate." However, Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter, who also met with the former Patriots video assistant Tuesday, said yesterday he wants an independent, impartial investigation into the team's illegal taping practices. "What is necessary is an objective investigation, and this one has not been objective," said Specter.
The ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Specter stopped short of calling for a congressional investigation during his 35-minute press conference, but hinted at the possibility of hearings.
"If they don't [act], I think it's up to Congress to investigate and take corrective action," said Specter, who said his office has been stonewalled in its attempts to investigate. "It might be hearings. My col leagues will know and have access to all the information I do, but let them decide."
Specter said the chairman of the committee, Democrat Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, who would
have to approve any hearings, had volunteered to authorize committee expenses if Specter wanted to send out investigators, but Specter declined.
The NFL issued a statement yesterday reacting to Specter's declaration: "We respectfully disagree with Senator Specter's characterization of the investigation conducted by our office. We are following up after [Tuesday's] meeting with Matt Walsh."
Patriots spokesman Stacey James said the team referred all questions to the league.
Specter's call for an independent investigation was clearly designed to pressure the NFL not to bury "Spygate" now that Walsh has come forward with information that Goodell said Tuesday is fundamentally consistent with what caused him to fine the Patriots $250,000, coach Bill Belichick $500,000, and dock the team its 2008 first-round draft choice for the totality of their conduct. The punishment was levied four days after the Patriots were caught filming signals Sept. 9 in their season opener against the Jets.
In advocating for an independent inquiry, Specter cited what he called a conflict of interest for the NFL. He said the league and its owners have a financial incentive to put the scandal behind them because "the core of their game is integrity." "The league has every reason not to want to say too much," said Specter. "If the public loses confidence in professional football, it will be like wrestling. They're not going to have the gates. They're not going to have the TV. It's going to be a totally different thing."
Specter also said he was troubled by Walsh telling him that Dan Goldberg, whom Walsh identified as a Patriots attorney, was present at his NFL interview and was allowed to ask questions. Specter, a former Philadelphia district attorney, said to call such a practice objective "strains credulity."
Besides his call for an independent inquiry, Specter provided more detail on how Walsh claimed the Patriots used the tapes of other teams' signals.
According to Specter, Walsh told him a former Patriots offensive player told Walsh that before a 2000 game against the Buccaneers, the player was called into a meeting with Belichick, then-offensive coordinator Charlie Weis, and team football research director Ernie Adams. At that meeting, according to Specter, Walsh said it was explained to the player how the team would utilize Tampa Bay signals it had filmed during a preseason game that year.
Walsh was told by the player, whose identity Specter would not divulge, that he memorized Tampa Bay's signals, then watched from the sideline for the Buccaneers' defensive calls. He would decipher the signals and pass them along to Weis, who would relay the information to the quarterback on the field. Specter said the player told Walsh the tape allowed the Patriots to anticipate 75 percent of the play calls.
The Patriots lost that Sept. 3, 2000, game, 21-16.
Specter also said Walsh, who worked for the Patriots from 1997-2003 before being fired, told him he saw Steve Scarnecchia, son of Patriots offensive line coach Dante Scarnecchia and the Jets' current video director, filming signals for the Patriots.
Specter's 11-page floor statement referenced games against the Steelers Sept. 9, 2002; the Cowboys Nov. 16, 2003; and the Steelers Sept. 25, 2005 - all Patriot wins - as ones Walsh witnessed Steve Scarnecchia taping. Walsh said he witnessed the taping because he was a season ticket-holder. However, the Sept. 25, 2005, game was played in Pittsburgh, calling into question Walsh's recollection.
Specter also said Walsh told him he was instructed to conceal his filming by saying he was filming tight shots of players or the down markers, and that Walsh was given a generic credential instead of one identifying him as team personnel.
Walsh made similar remarks to HBO last night in an interview that will air tomorrow, the Associated Press reported. "If it was of little or no importance, I imagine they wouldn't have continued to do it, and probably not taken the chances of going down onto the field in Pittsburgh or shooting from other teams' stadiums the way we did," Walsh said of the Patriots' taping procedures.
Walsh also told HBO he was coached on how to evade NFL rules limiting the number of camera operators per team to two, and that team officials instructed him on ways to avoid detection.
Specter, critical of the NFL's handling of the case from the outset, yesterday remained rankled by Goodell's decision to destroy the six tapes from late in the 2006 regular season and the 2007 preseason and notes dating to 2002 that the Patriots turned over to the league.
Many have questioned Specter's motives for pressuring the NFL. He responded to a question about his link to the cable company Comcast, which is battling the NFL over the NFL Network, by saying, "I've been at this line of work for a long time and no one has ever questioned my integrity."
It was not until Specter's Feb. 13 meeting with Goodell that the league publicly confirmed the taping dated to 2000, which Belichick had told the NFL in September.
In his statement, Specter said the league's lack of candor, piecemeal disclosures, changes in position on material matters, and failure to be proactive in seeking out other key witnesses makes an impartial investigation "mandatory." "I think they owe the public a lot more candor and a lot more credibility," said Specter.
Christopher L. Gasper can be reached at cgasper@globe.com.

Wednesday, May 28, 2008

Specter on the Issues

ABORTION

Voted NO on barring HHS grants to organizations that perform abortions. (Oct 2007)
Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007)
Voted NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions. (Jul 2006)
Voted NO on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives. (Mar 2005)
Voted NO on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. (Jun 2000)
Voted NO on banning human cloning. (Feb 1998)
Expand embryonic stem cell research. (Jun 2004)
Rated 14% by the National Right to Life Committee (indicating pro-choice record)

IMMIGRATION


Voted YES on comprehensive immigration reform. (Jun 2007)
Voted NO on eliminating the "Y" nonimmigrant guestworker program. (May 2007)
Voted YES on establishing a Guest Worker program. (May 2006)
Voted YES on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security. (May 2006)
Voted YES on giving Guest Workers a path to citizenship. (May 2006)
Voted NO on limit welfare for immigrants. (Jun 1997)
Rated 16% by United States Border Control, indicating an open-border stance. (Dec 2006)

TAX REFORM

Voted NO on reducing marriage penalty instead of cutting top tax rates. (May 2001)
Voted NO on increasing tax deductions for college tuition. (May 2001)
Voted NO on requiring super-majority for raising taxes. (Apr 1998)

CIVIL RIGHTS

Oppose gay marriage but support civil union. (Oct 2004)
Voted NO on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage. (Jun 2006)
Voted YES on expanding hate crimes to include sexual orientation. (Jun 2000)
Voted YES on setting aside 10% of highway funds for minorities & women. (Mar 1998)
Voted NO on ending special funding for minority & women-owned business. (Oct 1997)
Voted NO on banning affirmative action hiring with federal funds. (Jul 1995)

DRUGS

Voted NO on increasing penalties for drug offenses. (Nov 1999)
Voted YES on spending international development funds on drug control. (Jul 1996)

EDUCATION

Voted NO on $52M for "21st century community learning centers". (Oct 2005)
Voted NO on $5B for grants to local educational agencies. (Oct 2005)
Voted YES on shifting $11B from corporate tax loopholes to education. (Mar 2005)
Voted NO on funding smaller classes instead of private tutors. (May 2001)
Voted NO on requiring schools to allow voluntary prayer. (Jul 1994)
Voted YES on national education standards. (Feb 1994)

ENERGY AND OIL

Voted YES on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies. (Jun 2007)
Voted YES on factoring global warming into federal project planning. (May 2007)
Voted NO on do not require ethanol in gasoline. (Aug 1994)
Keep efficient air conditioner rule to conserve energy. (Mar 2004)

ENVIRONMENT

Voted NO on prohibiting eminent domain for use as parks or grazing land. (Dec 2007)
Make EPA into a Cabinet department. (May 2002)

GOVERNMENT REFORM

Voted YES on granting the District of Columbia a seat in Congress. (Sep 2007)
Voted NO on establishing the Senate Office of Public Integrity. (Mar 2006)
Voted YES on banning "soft money" contributions and restricting issue ads. (Mar 2002)
Voted YES on favoring 1997 McCain-Feingold overhaul of campaign finance. (Oct 1997)
Voted NO on banning more types of Congressional gifts. (Jul 1995) Reduce federal government size & scope, including military. (Sep 1998)

GUN CONTROL

Voted NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence. (Mar 2004)

HEALTH CARE

Voted YES on adding 2 to 4 million children to SCHIP eligibility. (Nov 2007)
Voted YES on allowing reimportation of Rx drugs from Canada. (Jul 2002)
Voted YES on allowing patients to sue HMOs & collect punitive damages. (Jun 2001)

HOMELAND SECURITY

Voted NO on limiting soldiers' deployment to 12 months. (Jul 2007)
Voted YES on implementing the 9/11 Commission report. (Mar 2007)
Voted YES on preserving habeus corpus for Guantanamo detainees. (Sep 2006)
Voted NO on restricting business with entities linked to terrorism. (Jul 2005)

*Courtesy of www.ontheissues.org

Defeat Arlen Specter in 2010


This blog is devoted to keeping Pennsylvania voters informed of the liberal positions and actions taken by Senator Arlen Specter, the senior senator of Pennsylvania. For too long Senator Specter has represented the people of Pennsylvania with his liberal beliefs by representing higher taxes, supporting government waste, advocating pro-choice policies, defeating conservative judges, and promoting anti-gun legislation.


In 2010, Republicans must work to defeat Arlen Specter in the Republican Primary. We must work to elect a candidate that represents the conservative values of Pennsylvanians through promoting smaller government, lower taxes, strict constructionist judges, the protection of human life, and respect for Pennsylvanian's Second Amendment right to bear arms.


I would urge all visitors who have a Facebook account to join "Defeat Arlen Specter in 2010" group at http://http//www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=17037854026 .


Feel free to email me with any tips you may have in running this blog. Also feel free to comment on any of the posts, and best of all, please work to promote this blog throughout the blogosphere so that conservatives in Pennsylvania can begin to have their voice heard.