From: Gary Britt 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------010707040101060609020201
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Sorry, I was a bit unclear on a couple things that you corrected me on. I
still think its illegal, and if not illegal it should be.  If these people
really wanted to reach the poor in those communities they would do it a
grocery stores, liquor stores, and churches in those communities, and they
wouldn't have to do it only around the time of a major national election.

Do these people do this flu shot stuff last year?  Have they ever done
during a LOCAL ONLY election?

It doesn't pass the smell test.

Gary


Robert G Lewis wrote:
> The Mayor did not determine that it was against the law,
>
> "There was no political motive whatsoever to do it,"said Mayor Bill
> White, the former head of the Texas Democratic Party. He said he ended
> the program Wednesday, after it provided 1,300 flu shots over three
> days, because he didn't want"to spend more money in defending a
> baseless lawsuit than we're giving away in vaccine or allow anybody to
> question the integrity of the political process."
>
> it's not illegal , NOTHING is given for the VOTE,  there is NO
> REQUIREMENT TO VOTE as was pointed out with references
>
> It's not a single day event, it was to be through Friday, not on
> election day.as has been pointed out, yet you still make this false claim.
>
>
>
> "Gary Britt"  > wrote in message
> news:454aa54b{at}w3.nls.net...
>
>
>     Its still ILLEGAL.  The county clerk said there was no problem IF
>     it was not against the law.  The Mayor rightly determined it IS
>     against the law.
>
>     Then you quote this bullshit from someone else:
>
>     Polls are an ideal place to access large numbers of people who
>     need the vaccine."I'm disappointed this has happened,"he said.
>
>     So is the local grocery store, church, liquor store.  In fact much
>     more likely to get MORE people at those places than a single day
>     polling place event.  If it was really about serving the poor flu
>     shots, they wouldn't be REQUIRED to do it ONLY at polling places
>     on election day.  How are the drunks who don't vote supposed to
>     get their flu shot????   Don't they deserve a flu shot?  In fact
>     aren't they more in need of a flu shot than people with enough
>     sense to vote?  Want to get the poor drunks set up outside the
>     local liquor store or 7-eleven.
>
>     Its obvious this doesn't have a damn thing to do with flu shots
>     for the poor from the perspective of the people paying for the
>     program.  Hence the "funds only for polling place flu shots".
>
>     Gary
>
>
>     Robert G Lewis wrote:
>>     During early voting ,NOT  on election day and apparently cleared
>>     by the REPUBLICAN County Clerk and the REPUBLICAN Secretary of
>>     State. NO REQUIREMENT TO VOTE in order to get the shots. Just
>>     have to over the age of 50.
>>
>>     http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2006Nov02/0,4670,VoteandVaccinate,00..html
>>    
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2006Nov02/0,4670,VoteandVaccinate,00...htm
l>
>>
>>     Dr. Douglas Shenson, the director of the flu-shot program for the
>>     foundation, said he does not know of problems with the program in
>>     any other city.
>>
>>     "It's an entirely nonpartisan and nonpolitical
activity,"Shenson
>>     said."It's not a get-out-the-vote campaign. It's a
>>     get-out-the-vaccine campaign."
>>
>>     Polls are an ideal place to access large numbers of people who
>>     need the vaccine."I'm disappointed this has happened,"he said.
>>
>>
>>     http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/4298775.html
>>
>>
>>     The "Vote and Vaccination" clinics are in Hispanic and black
>>     neighborhoods because studies show these ethnic groups are less
>>     likely to get flu shots, said Porfirio Villarreal, a spokesman
>>     for the city's health department.
>>
>>     "This has nothing to do with politics," he said. "It's an
>>     initiative to reach people who are at high risk and would not go
>>     to a doctor and clinic, but do take advantage of voting."
>>
>>
>>     I expect you would also object to giving people rides to the
>>     polls , or handing out absentee ballots.
>>
>>
>>     Why do you object to the local government setting up free flu
>>     shots in poor areas ? Why do you object to free flu shots for the
>>     poor ?
>>
>>
>>
>>         "Gary Britt" >         > wrote in message
>>         news:454a8cda{at}w3.nls.net...
>>
>>         You quoted the part that makes it illegal Robert:
>>
>>         Stephen Williams, the city health chief, and White said the terms of
the
>>         *Amerigroup grant required a tie to polling places* in medically
undeserved
>>         areas where populations are less likely to get vaccinations.
>>
>>         So the "private" funding REQUIRED that the flu
shots be given out
ONLY on election day, and
>>         ONLY at polling places.  Yeah that's a real intent to serve the poor
there.  Nothing to do with people canvassing neighborhoods and telling
people come on down to vote, will drive you, and if you do come down and
vote you can get a free flu shot.
>>
>>         What if a "private" group wanted to fund some
"fun" into the lives
of the poor neighborhoods where there isn't a lot of "fun" and
set up funding for people to vote at a local liquor store and get a free
pint of whiskey of their choice.  Would you see any problems with that? 
Because that is EXACTLY the same as this bullshit flu shot vote fraud
scheme.
>>
>>         Are you and Rich against poor people having some free fun and voting
at liquor stores?
>>
>>         Gary
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>         Robert G Lewis wrote:
>>>         From the article
>>>
>>>         Before launching the program, Williams' staff consulted with
Republican
>>>         Harris County Clerk Beverly Kaufman, the county's top election
official, who
>>>         offered support provided that the initiative complied with
applicable laws.
>>>
>>>         Kaufman's spokesman, David Beirne, said erroneous media reports
might have
>>>         fueled the perception that voting was related to receiving
something of
>>>         value, which could violate the law. "It's not
tied to the voting
practice,
>>>         which is a critical element," he said. "We
did not see anything on
its face
>>>         to indicate that it would be a clear violation of
election law."
>>>
>>>         Scott Haywood, a spokesman for Texas Secretary of State Roger
Williams, also
>>>         a Republican, said in an e-mail that "there is
nothing wrong with a
health
>>>         clinic being located at the same site that voting is
taking place,"
provided
>>>         that people weren't required to vote to get the service.
>>>
>>>         Stephen Williams, the city health chief, and White
said the terms
of the
>>>         Amerigroup grant required a tie to polling places in medically
underserved
>>>         areas where populations are less likely to get vaccinations.
>>>
>>>
>>>         "Gary Britt"
 wrote in message
>>>         news:454a79b3$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>
>>>>         Its the law.  Giving somebody booze, cigarettes,
money, gold, or a
flu
>>>>         shot is paying for somebody to vote and violated a
very specific
statute
>>>>         applicable to that region.
>>>>
>>>>         Its also bullshit they were trying to reach
medically undeserved
areas.
>>>>         They were trying to pay people to come vote.
>>>>
>>>>         Gary
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         Phil Payne wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>        
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/chronicle/4304540.html
>>>>>
>>>>>         "Mayor Bill White ordered a halt
Wednesday to the city health
>>>>>         department's
>>>>>         privately funded drive to offer flu
vaccinations at early voting
sites in
>>>>>         predominantly Hispanic and black
neighborhoods, amid conservative
>>>>>         criticism
>>>>>         that the effort would boost Democratic turnout.
>>>>>
>>>>>         About 1,300 flu shots were given to people age
50 or older in the
past
>>>>>         three
>>>>>         days under the program, which didn't require
the recipients to
vote.
>>>>>         Health
>>>>>         officials said they were only trying to reach
people in medically
>>>>>         underserved communities."
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>


--------------010707040101060609020201
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit




  



Sorry, I was a bit unclear on a couple things that you corrected me
on.  I still think its illegal, and if not illegal it should
be.  If these people really wanted to reach the poor in those
communities they would do it a grocery stores, liquor stores, and churches
in those communities, and they wouldn't have to do it only around the time
of a major national election.

Do these people do this flu shot stuff last year?  Have they ever
done during a LOCAL ONLY election?

It doesn't pass the smell test.

Gary


Robert G Lewis wrote:

  
  
  The Mayor did not determine
that it was against
the law, 
   
  "There was no political
motive whatsoever to do
it,"said Mayor Bill White, the former head of the Texas Democratic
Party. He said he ended the program Wednesday, after it provided 1,300 flu
shots over three days, because he didn't want"to spend more money in
defending a baseless lawsuit than we're giving away in vaccine or allow
anybody to question the integrity of the political
process."
   
  it's not illegal , NOTHING is
given for the
VOTE,  there is NO REQUIREMENT TO VOTE as was pointed out with
references
   
  It's not a single day event, it
was to be through
Friday, not on election day.as has been pointed out, yet you still make
this false claim.
   
   
   
  "Gary Britt" <glbNOSPAM{at}g">mailto:glbNOSPAM{at}gencogDOTcom.com">glbNOSPAM{at}g
encogDOTcom.com>
wrote in message news:454aa54b{at}w3.nls.net...
  
 Its still
ILLEGAL.  The county clerk said there was no problem IF it was not
against the law.  The Mayor rightly determined it IS against the
law.
    
Then you quote this bullshit from someone else:
    
    Polls are an ideal
place to access large
numbers of people who need the vaccine."I'm disappointed this has
happened,"he said.
    
So is the local grocery store, church, liquor store.  In fact much
more likely to get MORE people at those places than a single day polling
place event.  If it was really about serving the poor flu shots,
they wouldn't be REQUIRED to do it ONLY at polling places on election
day.  How are the drunks who don't vote supposed to get their flu
shot????  
Don't they deserve a flu shot?  In fact aren't they more in need
of a flu shot than people with enough sense to vote?  Want to get
the poor drunks set up outside the local liquor store or
7-eleven.
    
Its obvious this doesn't have a damn thing to do with flu shots for the
poor from the perspective of the people paying for the program. 
Hence the "funds only for polling place flu shots".
    
Gary
    
    
Robert G Lewis wrote:
    
      
      
      During early voting ,NOT
 on election day and
apparently cleared by the REPUBLICAN County Clerk and the REPUBLICAN
Secretary of State. NO REQUIREMENT TO VOTE in order to get the shots. Just
have to over the age of 50.
       
      http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2006Nov02/0,4670,VoteandVaccinate,00...html
">http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2006Nov02/0,4670,VoteandVaccinate,00..html
font>
       
      Dr. Douglas Shenson, the
director of the
flu-shot program for the foundation, said he does not know of problems with
the program in any other city.
       
      "It's an entirely
nonpartisan and
nonpolitical activity,"Shenson said."It's not a get-out-the-vote
campaign. It's a get-out-the-vaccine
campaign."
       
      Polls are an ideal place to
access large
numbers of people who need the vaccine."I'm disappointed this has
happened,"he said.
       
       
      http://www.ch" target="new">http://www.ch">http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/4298775.html">http://www.ch
ron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/4298775.html
       
       
      The "Vote and
Vaccination" clinics are in
Hispanic and black neighborhoods because studies show these ethnic groups
are less likely to get flu shots, said Porfirio Villarreal, a spokesman for
the city's health department.
       
      "This has nothing to
do with politics," he
said. "It's an initiative to reach people who are at high risk and
would not go to a doctor and clinic, but do take advantage of
voting."
       
       
      I expect you would also
object to giving
people rides to the polls , or handing out absentee ballots.
       
       
      Why do you object to the
local government
setting up free flu shots in poor areas ? Why do you object to free flu
shots for the poor ?
       
       
      

        "Gary Britt" <glbNOSPAM{at}gencogDOTcom.com>">mailto:glbNOSPAM{at}gencogDOTcom.com">glbNOSPAM{at}gencogDOTcom.com>
wrote in message news:454a8cda{at}w3.nls.net...
        
You quoted the part that makes it illegal Robert:
        
        Stephen Williams, the city health
chief, and White said
the terms of the
Amerigroup grant
required a tie to polling
places in medically undeserved areas
where populations are less likely to get vaccinations.

So the "private"
funding REQUIRED that the flu shots be
given out ONLY on election day, and ONLY at polling places.  Yeah that's a
real intent to serve the poor there. Nothing to do with people canvassing
neighborhoods and telling people come on down to vote, will drive you, and
if you do come down and vote you can get a free flu shot.

What if a "private" group wanted to fund some "fun"
into the lives of the poor neighborhoods where there isn't a lot of
"fun" and set up funding for people to vote at a local liquor
store and get a free pint of whiskey of their choice. Would you see any
problems with that?  Because that is EXACTLY the same as this bullshit flu
shot vote fraud scheme.

Are you and Rich against poor people having some free fun and voting at
liquor stores?

Gary

        
        
        
        
        
Robert G Lewis wrote:
        

          From the article

Before launching the program, Williams' staff consulted with Republican
Harris County Clerk Beverly Kaufman, the county's top election official,
who offered support provided that the initiative complied with applicable
laws.

Kaufman's spokesman, David Beirne, said erroneous media reports might have
fueled the perception that voting was related to receiving something of
value, which could violate the law. "It's not tied to the voting
practice, which is a critical element," he said. "We did not see
anything on its face to indicate that it would be a clear violation of
election law."

Scott Haywood, a spokesman for Texas Secretary of State Roger Williams,
also a Republican, said in an e-mail that "there is nothing wrong with
a health clinic being located at the same site that voting is taking
place," provided that people weren't required to vote to get the
service.

Stephen Williams, the city health chief, and White said the terms of the
Amerigroup grant required a tie to polling places in medically underserved
areas where populations are less likely to get vaccinations.


"Gary Britt" <glbNOSPAM{at}gencogDOTcom.com>mailto:glbNOSPAM{at}gencogDOTcom.com"><glbNOSPAM{at}gencogDOTcom.com>
> wrote in message
news:454a79b
3$1{at}w3.nls.net...
  
          
            Its the law.  Giving somebody
booze, cigarettes,
money, gold, or a flu
shot is paying for somebody to vote and violated a very specific statute
applicable to that region.

Its also bullshit they were trying to reach medically undeserved areas.
They were trying to pay people to come vote.

Gary


Phil Payne wrote:
    
            
              http://www.c" target="new">http://www.c">http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/chronicle/4304540.html">http://www.c
hron.com/disp/story.mpl/chronicle/4304540.html

"Mayor Bill White ordered a halt Wednesday to the city health department's
privately funded drive to offer flu vaccinations at early voting sites in
predominantly Hispanic and black neighborhoods, amid conservative criticism
that the effort would boost Democratic turnout.

About 1,300 flu shots were given to people age 50 or older in the past three
days under the program, which didn't require the recipients to vote. Health
officials said they were only trying to reach people in medically
underserved communities."


      
            
          
          

  
        
        
      
    
    
  





--------------010707040101060609020201--

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5