The old Lucerne Hotel. Courtesy photo.

I don't like to make big pleas to local officials in a public way very often, because I like to save up for the big ticket items.

But the time has come. So, here goes.

On Tuesday, the Board of Supervisors – if its members care at all about the future of the Northshore town of Lucerne – should give direction to county administrative staff to begin the process of purchasing the old Lucerne Hotel, which some of us here who know and love the building affectionately call “the Castle.”

Ignore that sound that you hear off in the distance of a screaming man in a buffalo print shirt and I'll explain.

In recent years, thanks mostly to the Lake County Redevelopment Agency, the county has purchased a lot of property for the purpose of sprucing up the county. That's not an entirely popular business with some folks, including Supervisor Rob Brown (hopefully he's stopped screaming in frustration by now).

A few years ago, when Brown happened to take a vacation and neglected to make sure his office at the courthouse was locked, county staff did a little modifying, draping his office in pink decorations, among them a prominent “I love redevelopment” poster – printed in pink – on one wall. It was pretty priceless. Wish I could find the pictures I took of that.

To his credit, Brown hasn't ruled out every redevelopment-funded property purchase the county has made, and has generally looked at them based on impact and merit.

In November 2007 he wholeheartedly supported the purchase of Clark's Island in Clearlake Oaks as a way of dealing with a blighted property that impacted the lake. When he embraced the purchase at a meeting a few months before the final vote to purchase, Supervisor Jeff Smith couldn't help himself – he had to give Brown a good ribbing about it, telling him, “You are coming around.”

So, there are no real absolutes in this process, and for the most part it's been approached with a great deal of care and investigation. I've appreciated it when board members question the process and are willing to disagree, because the resulting dialog has benefited the county's residents.

Now comes the announcement that the Lucerne Christian Conference Center – the group that owns the Castle – is putting it up for sale. No asking price yet, but they want to sell it fairly fast.

I have to make a quick qualification here – I live in Lucerne, within view of the Castle and just around the corner from it. Its spires greet me every day, and I'm utterly in love with the building.

So this is an appeal from the heart, not just from mine but from our little community's.

Please, Rob Brown, Jim Comstock, Tony Farrington, Jeff Smith, Denise Rushing ... buy the Castle for the entire county.

I've seen few buildings as unique in my travels around the rural reaches of Northern California. Personally, I can think of no other place that best exemplifies the possibilities for redevelopment than the Castle. How many opportunities does anyone have – whether private individuals or government agencies – to buy a big, beautiful white castle?

It's one of the county's largest buildings at 75,000 square feet, and one of the tallest at seven stories.

Why should the county buy this building?

Well, for one, to protect it. That, quite honestly, is the first and best reason.

The Castle has had a lot of missed opportunities since construction on it began in 1926, part of a vast dream for Lucerne. It wasn't even completed when the despair of the Great Depression descended on the country, leading to its first sale.

Now, here we are again, in a period now being called the Great Recession, and the Castle is on the block once more, littered with broken dreams and the best of intentions.

If nothing else, the board should purchase the building to protect it from the kind of real estate speculators who have held a death grip on Lucerne for years, buying up properties in key locations and then attempting to sell them – often to the county – for outrageously inflated rates often double the market value. It's part of the reason that I believe Lucerne still languishes economically and socially.

If you think I'm paranoid, you have to remember that I've both been studying this from a professional standpoint as a journalist and as a resident of this town. So I have some information that isn't widely known.

For example, I've come across information that indicates some of these same speculators I'm concerned about had their eyes on the Lucerne Alpine Senior Center. I don't believe it's any mistake that, when the county offered monetary support to get that center back on its feet, it included ironclad protections to try to keep the building's holding nonprofit from losing the property to a private owner.

That's a nightmare scenario for many Lucernians; but just as bad – or possibly worse – is the prospect that one of these speculators attempts to purchase the Castle and turn it into something such as a drug rehab or flop house, which we're all full up on, thank you very much.

If that happens, I guarantee, it will put a spike through the heart of this community. And it's going to be torch and pitchfork time here in the neighborhood. The mess that could result might find the county having to intervene and try to buy the building anyway, at a much-inflated price.

There's also the outrageous suggestion being made by the current owners to start selling off pieces of the seven-acre property the building sits on while they're waiting for a buyer, which would eat away at the building's opportunities.

Another reason to buy the building: There's nothing like it anywhere, situated as it is, with what is arguably one of the most beautiful settings to be found. Napa and Sonoma counties may have grand buildings, but I can't think of a castle overlooking the water, as you would find in the original Lucerne in Switzerland – which, incidentally, is believed to be that country's most popular tourist destination.

Along other stretches of the Northshore, the county has taken the opportunity to buy and revitalize or give assistance in revitalizing areas that were either historically town centers or could serve as centers in areas where there weren't any.

Take The Plaza project in Clearlake Oaks, where the community and its willingness to partner with local government has put them very much ahead of the game in recreating what was reportedly once the little town's focal point. That project will reestablish a town center around which business and services can rotate.

In Nice, last summer the board decided to purchase Holiday Harbor, again suggesting it could be a town square, rather than the Hinman Park area previously chosen. That decision, according to District 3 Supervisor Denise Rushing, was urged by community members.

Brown, however, wasn't happy about it, especially from the standpoint that the county's redevelopment plan had centered on Hinman, and it represented a case of changing horses midstream. His reaction was a reasonable and understandable reaction to having a longstanding plan seem suddenly to change.

Lucerne already has a town center. It's the Castle. The town's widest street, 13^th Avenue, was created to lead directly to the building, which is framed elegantly at the end of the street.

The county's redevelopment plan calls for commercial development with a mixed-use element – apartments over businesses – lining 13^th Avenue. Those plans, connected to the Castle as a community and conference center and hotel, would be a masterstroke, and could end up being redevelopment's crowning achievement in Lake County.

The building's pool, tennis and basketball courts could be updated, its facilities improved. Lease out restaurant and pub space, have a day spa, a book shop and even rent out the hotel rooms, use its undeveloped grounds as a park, offer much-needed after school activities for local children. New and existing businesses could be stimulated and expanded in such an environment.

Just as reasonable an option is that the county purchase the land and hold it for resale to a thoroughly vetted and proven developer with a portfolio of successful, similar projects. The county also could enter into a unique public-private partnership with a commercial business that would provide a conference center and office space for county government functions mixed with business and community use.

There are literally endless options.

But what isn't an option here is letting this pass us by. Redevelopment isn't a concept that has universal approval or appeal, as we've already discussed, but I've seen it do tremendous good in Lake County.

I've seen what the impact of one building can be to a community. Here in Lucerne in 2007 the county purchased and demolished “the blue monster,” an old house that had become a lakeside eyesore.

The impact of having that building gone has been incredible on the town's look and feel. It's as if the evening light hits the town differently, with that lurking bulk out of the way. We're also eagerly awaiting the scheduled demolition this spring of two blighted motels on the other end of town.

Great, you say. But what about the money? How can the county afford this at such a difficult economic time?

I'm glad you asked.

Here's the great part about redevelopment: The county redevelopment agency can finance this purchase.

Let me say that again: The county has the ability to do this. They can buy the Castle today and begin the process of saving it. Redevelopment can make that happen.

So, yes, it's possible. I've confirmed with county officials that the funding possibilities exist.

This will come down purely to a political decision for our board. If the money is there, it will be more about ideological concerns about government getting involved in private property ownership and commercial development.

However, we live in interesting times. With what's happening in our government right now – buying shares of banks and finance companies – the expectations of what government should be and what it should do have changed forever. The federal government has set the precedent of buying into private enterprise elsewhere, although not very well, but I believe our local government has the ability to make public-private partnerships work.

That's because I have faith in certain key people, who have made redevelopment work for the people of this county. They can take this opportunity and use redevelopment for a vast project of community rebuilding.

The chance is here now, however, and may not last long. If the county tarries too much, the Castle could fall into an ownership that once again can't do the right things due to lack of will, knowledge or finance.

If the heart of the community isn't addressed, then other attempts to revitalize the Lucerne community may be seriously diminished. From that building flows huge possibilities, both good and bad, depending on what happens to it next.

This isn't an opportunity likely to present itself again – at least while the building is standing in its current condition. The next time, it could be a battered ruin, the saving of which could cost millions more than it would take today to turn it into a world-class community and conference center.

To the community: If you support this, let your supervisors know. E-mail them (you can find their addresses by going to this page and clicking on your district in the lefthand side of the page: www.co.lake.ca.us/Government/Boards/Board_of_Supervisors.htm), call them at 263-2368 or – better yet – show up at the Board of Supervisors meeting on Tuesday. The Castle is scheduled to be discussed at 11:15 a.m.

To our supervisors, I implore you: Storm the Castle. Take it. Let the community come together to plan a future for it. You hesitate at the community's peril.

Elizabeth Larson is publisher and editor of Lake County News and proud to live in Lucerne.

{mos_sb_discuss:4}

Entering the forest at Goat Mountain. Courtesy photo.

“Shall I not have intelligence with the Earth?

Am I not partly leaves and vegetable mould myself?”

– Henry David Thoreau, “On Walden’s Pond”

You’re taking a hike along your favorite wooded trail and gradually you realize that this is no ordinary walk. Suddenly your awareness is heightened and you hear, smell, taste and feel things that you have not encountered on previous walks through the same woods.

You notice more birds singing. The colors of their feathers are somehow brighter, bolder. You are hearing other movements in the forest depths. A squirrel shows itself to you scampering up a nearby tree. The insects are having a conversation and when you hear them speak your awareness shifts and then you see them: ants, beetles, flies, butterflies, moths and worms burrowing in the soil.

As you look up and see the sky, it is as if for the first time. You notice the unique whiteness of the clouds and the way they billow in and away, in and away. The sky is not just blue but many shades of blue – over here there is azure, and over there the color of a robin’s egg, and here right above you sapphire as dazzling as the jewel.

The trees actually seem to be speaking, beckoning you to come closer to them and to touch the rough and smooth bark, the skin of the tree, the glistening leaves, the trees’ fingers touching yours. You are one with this place.

You feel connected without a sense of ownership but with a firm belief that you are somehow a part of a larger family. Yet this family consists of beings other than your human self and this place, not yours but of you. In these woods you feel a connection; a deeper sense of place than that which you feel in your personal dwelling, with your human family.

Gratefulness then envelopes you. You want to shout out “THANK YOU” to every being that is around you, to all that you sense and hear and feel in this place of great beauty, this wooded trail, this place of beings that are not human.

You continue to walk and your heart is so overwhelmed with joy and gratitude for this place that your tears flow freely, dropping on the soft earth, moistening it with a piece of you. And then the trail leads you out of the woods, out to a prairie of grasses and scattered oak trees and chemise.

And once again you are noticing; seeing, hearing, feeling; tasting the wind on your tongue, feeling its touch on your face, cool and soft. The grasses are swaying with the wind as if they are being gently petted by some great unseen hand.

In the distance a herd of elk slowly grazing, gaining nourishment from the grasses, look to you and you sense rather than feel that the grasses are grateful for the elk eating them and you remember the circle of life.

As you continue walking you realize that this journey is coming to an end and the ordinariness begins to return. And yet, you have a knowing; intelligence has spoken to you, hearts have touched you. These beings are not of you yet are part of who you are and who you’re becoming.

Your epiphany is this: Care for the environment is your greatest imperative. Realizing this you pledge to be of greater assistance in restoring and preserving this natural beauty.

You now know that environmental activism is just that, being active in protecting the natural environment. You remember all of the organizations and individuals who are dedicated to the protection of our natural world and your feelings of gratefulness return. You now know that this spirit you found in nature is deeply consonant with your greater capacities.

Your journey through the woods and the prairie has made you more deeply aware of your relationship with the world that surrounds you. This ego-transcending experience has given you a greater drive to preserve the earth’s unspoiled places and to restore those places spoiled by the human hand. You are aware that what you have just experienced is a solidarity fundamental to your existence on this planet.

Because of this encounter you have a greater understanding of this deeper form of environmentalism and you have experienced the humble connection to the mystical oneness with nature such as what Muir and Thoreau experienced. Two American naturalists connecting to nature and inviting others to connect. This same inspiration is now leading you to action just as it led them to their work. Not as much of practicality as by a spiritual affinity with our natural world.

You’re away from the prairie now and you see your car in the distance where you parked at the beginning of your hike. You approach and on the seat are books you have read many times but now you have a “knowing” and the truth of the words spoken in the books touch you more deeply, your resolve is strengthened and your faith returns.

“I used to envy the father of our race, dwelling as he did in contact with the new man-made fields and plants of Eden; but I do so no more, because I have discovered that I also live in 'creation’s dawn.' The morning stars still sing together, and the world not yet half made, becomes more beautiful everyday.” – John Muir

Debra Chase is the executive director of Tuleyome, a nonprofit working to protect both our wild heritage and our agricultural heritage for future generations; visit the group at www.tuleyome.org. Chase resides on a small family farm in Colusa County.

{mos_sb_discuss:4}

Congressman Mike Thompson doesn't want rural America to be forgotten when it comes to making critical investments in infrastructure and services. Courtesy photo.

Our country is facing some of the biggest challenges I’ve seen in my lifetime, and we must act quickly and carefully to put our country back on the path of greatness.

There has been much talk of the need to invest in infrastructure projects that will employ Americans while rebuilding our nation. But in this discussion once again America’s rural areas are being ignored.

Approximately 50 million Americans live in rural communities, and they face the same challenges confronting all other Americans.

People across this country are struggling to pay their mortgages and afford rising health care costs, while still putting groceries in their refrigerator and gas in their tanks.

But rural communities are hit even harder by the tough economy, especially when it comes to jobs. In my district, for example, one rural county’s unemployment is over three percentage points higher than the average for the state as a whole.

Despite the bleaker outlook facing rural communities, we fail to invest equitably in their economic health.

Right now, the federal government invests $500 less per person in rural communities than in urban areas. But this proportion does not fairly recognize the importance of rural infrastructure to our country’s economy.

For example, America’s interstate highways help transport 77 percent of America’s freight. On a typical day, about 33 million tons of goods, valued at about $27 billion, are transported across America’s highways.

We must recognize that the highways are more than just a way for rural folks to get to work, they are one of the main arteries of our country’s economy.

A broader stimulus plan that ultimately only funds projects in urban and suburban communities will fail to provide the broad economic benefit Congress intends.

Congress should build on the precedent created in previous funding bills to include similar guarantees of equitable funding for rural areas.

America’s economy cannot be restored to greatness without investing in all Americans, not just those in urban areas.

Congressman Mike Thompson represents Lake County in the US House of Representatives.

{mos_sb_discuss:4}

Quite a few of the news media used this headline: “Where'd the bailout money go? Shhhh, it's a secret.”

The Associated Press' Matt Apuzzo contacted 21 banks that have received at least $1 billion in government money and asked four questions: How much has been spent? What was it spent on? How much is being held in savings, and what's the plan for the rest?

None of the banks gave specific answers. One took it beyond stonewalling with, "I just would prefer if you wouldn't say that we're not going to discuss those details."

Another recent story disclosed the same banks awarded their top executives nearly $1.6 billion in salaries, bonuses and other benefits last year.

The news left many people stunned, but if you've looked at your credit card interest rates lately, you might have already been stunned. Maybe you asked them why; I did and got these answers.

The first is more responsive than what the top guys are telling the big media. The second is from a company whose chairman ran up a $211,182 bill for private jet travel last year when his family lived in Chicago and he commuted to New York.

Response from Citi

Subject: Your bailout money

Date/Time 12/19/08 03:15:57 PM

You wrote:

If you can afford to spend $400 million on naming rights for the Mets stadium, you can lower my interest rate. The government bailout was intended to help consumers.

Subject Re: Your bailout money

Date/Time 12/19/08 04:27:29 PM

Customer Service Wrote:

We would like to inform you that we have restored the APR on your account to the standard APR on all of the active balances, including:

- Balance Transfer Rates

- Rate Sale Offers

- Intro Rates

- APR Buy-Downs

The lower APR will appear on your next statement.

Thank you for using our website.

Response from Chase

Date:12-20-2008 11:46:47

From:Credit Card Support

Subject:Re: Fees/Finance Charges Message:

Dear SOPHIA JENSEN:

We apologize that our previous response did not fully address your inquiry and would like to take this

opportunity to resolve any remaining issues.

We've received $25 billion and we're working to make sound decisions; we want to be sure these funds will help us expand the flow of credit where it makes the most sense. This could help customers across our consumer, corporate, institutional and governmental client bases.

The funds we received will help us expand the flow of credit where it will be most effective. And, while we still have to make the right decisions for each and every customer, the purpose of the Troubled Assist Relief Program isn't individual assistance."

I know Congress is working diligently to make sure they can help consumers, and we're working to ensure that each account decision is handled appropriately in this current economic environment.

If further questions should arise regarding the information above, please call me at the number below. If you have concerns regarding any other issue, please contact Cardmember Services at 800-436-7927.

Thank you,

XXXX

Customer Care Specialist

Chase tried damage control Tuesday with a statement that they are "lending the fund to consumers, small businesses, corporations, municipalities and other institutions in a disciplined and responsible manner."

Credit unions aren't getting a lot of attention in this chaos, perhaps because they are only getting $40 billion total, and it can only be spent on mortgage help for their members. Both Mendo-Lake and Redwood credit unions serve Lake County.

Sophie Annan Jensen is a retired journalist. She lives in Lake County.

{mos_sb_discuss:4}

JoAnn Saccato is current chair of the Lake County Community Co-op.

While I am not in agreement with the recent decision of the Clearlake Planning Commission to recommend the Clearlake City Council certify the environmental impact report for the Provinsalia project, I am quite encouraged by the process and have a renewed hope for our democracy. People are becoming active in designing and co-creating the community we all call home.

Once, individual property rights were considered the top priority. Today, we can no longer deny the connected nature of all things, and the good of the whole community becomes more important than the good of the few. While once the path and priorities of a community were set by a select few, usually those with property and money, people have awakened to making those decisions that affect them and their community directly.

Provinsalia affects many aspects of the community. Clearlake’s population is beginning to see that there are seemingly far more important considerations at hand than a potential substantial profit for the owners, developers and contractors. Sewer, land use, traffic impact, environmental degradation and school impact are just a few of the areas where local community members have voiced opposition. My guess is that if a substantial portion of the community were found to be against a project, the City Council would be bound by ethical commitments to honor their constituents.

Here are a few more points of consideration:

– Raising the median income of Clearlake is a worthy goal, but, to do so by importing a population of a much higher income bracket to achieve this is, well, deceptive, in the least, and disregarding the current population at best. If our city is committed to this goal, which I wholeheartedly support, then the focus should be on the existing residents of Clearlake.

– Has the developer pledged to use local labor for construction and support services? How many of the current or recently completed construction projects in Clearlake use/d local contractors and labor? If our city were really committed to raising the living standards and median income of our residents, they would make efforts to ensure that our local citizens are being employed whenever possible, thus increasing income and the dollars spent in local community.

– What will Clearlake need to become in order to cater to this new population that we are enticing to move within our city limits? It is already well understood, and admitted by city staff at the last meeting, that residential development in itself actually cost cities money. So, cities usually depend on increased commercial activity to offset costs and positively affect the city’s coffers.

While this may be true (though hard to believe possible in the economic crisis we find ourselves), if the city were committed to supporting the existing locally owned small businesses and encouraged the continued gentrification of downtown and Lakeshore Drive, then this could be seen as a commendable act. But, instead, the city of Clearlake is negotiating with big box stores that will actually decrease local income due to the local multiplier effect (LME).

This economic function tells us that $100 spent at a national retailer yields a return of about $15 to the local economy, though, when that same $100 is spent with a local retailer, it returns about $45 or three times as much income to the local economy. Also, the returns in the community from the national chain stores are usually in the form of lower-level service job wages, and none of this even takes into account the local support services (i.e. accountants, printers, etc.) that local businesses utilize that chain retailers usually do not.1 If we are trying to grow decent paying jobs for residents, big box chains in our community will not support this, and they drive out the independently owned merchants. How many businesses closed as a result of Wal-Mart’s entrance into the city? How many more will close if Wal-Mart is allowed to expand? This doesn’t seem to be an effective way to support our local community or grow our local economy.

– This model of development is not only not sustainable, it is actually contributory to the current economic and environmental crises we find ourselves today. It is outdated and outmoded by new and diverse models of development that seek to uplift and benefit all equally rather than just a small, affluent portion of it. The model of the sustainable future includes infilling already existing development and designing communities for walking, bicycling and small electric motorized vehicles rather than large distances traveled by big automobiles. It includes revitalization efforts that include education to create and support small, local businesses and production.

Again, the happiness I feel stems from the fact that the whole community is participating in the future of development for Clearlake. People are stepping up and voicing their concerns and opinions. There is hope that Clearlake will not fall wayside to the now-crumbling dominant economic model of development that has contributed to the demise of our social, economic and environmental fabric. This, to me, is reason to celebrate.

JoAnn Saccato, a native of Lake County, is a master's student at Sonoma State University and current chair of the Lake County Community Co-op.

{mos_sb_discuss:4}

Consider some of the bogus claims we've debunked just since Election Day:

• It's not true that unionized auto workers at Detroit's Big Three make more than $70 an hour, as claimed by some opponents of federal aid.

• And no, 3 million workers won't be tossed out of work if aid is not forthcoming, as claimed by those favoring a taxpayer bailout.

• President-elect Obama never promised to seek a ban on all semi-automatic weapons, as claimed by some fearful gun owners.

• And no, Obama did not propose a Gestapo-like civilian security force as claimed by a Republican member of Congress from Georgia and any number of overwrought bloggers.

• Democrats in Congress are not discussing any plan to confiscate the assets in 401(k) retirement accounts, another falsehood spread about by chain e-mails and Internet postings.

• House Speaker Nancy Pelosi did not demand a 757-size personal jet, a false claim resurrected when Democrats criticized Big Three executives for flying to D.C. on their own private jets to beg for aid.

• And Pelosi's husband doesn't own a $17 million stake in a food company that she may (or may not) have tried to help with an exemption from a new minimum wage law.

Analysis

The troubles of the auto industry have spawned a number of exaggerations and falsehoods, including a couple of TV spots we're including here, claiming that millions of jobs will be lost if taxpayers don't cough up billions in aid to General Motors, Ford and Chrysler.

Three million jobs?

There's no question that hundreds of thousands of jobs would be lost should General Motors or Chrysler go under, delivering a severe blow to an economy already facing one of the worst recessions in modern history. But would it be three million as claimed in a TV spot by "America's Auto Dealers"? Or "millions" as claimed in another by the United Auto Workers?

Not likely, as we explained in detail in an Ask FactCheck item posted Dec. 24. That three million figure comes independently from two groups, one with ties to the automakers and another with a tie to the union. Both are based on the unlikely assumptions that all three automakers will be forced to shut down (Ford has said it can make it through without aid for now); that all their suppliers will go under; and that even Toyota, Honda and other foreign automakers will shut down all their U.S. manufacturing operations. Independent economists say all that isn't likely to happen. David Wyss, chief economist of Standard & Poor's, estimates that at worst half a million jobs would be lost if GM and Chrysler both go out of business.

$73 an hour?

On the other hand, it's not true that the unionized workers at the Big Three take home $75 an hour, as claimed by some bailout foes. That figure represents total labor costs, including wages paid to current workers and the cost of their benefits, plus a substantial amount paid to the Big Three's many retired workers for their pensions and health benefits.

The labor cost figure is higher than the estimated average labor costs for the U.S. plants of Toyota and other foreign producers, to be sure. But that's due largely to the fact that the foreign-owned plants aren't saddled with big payments to retired workers.

For more, see the Ask FactCheck item we posted Dec. 11 (http://factcheckcms.bootnetworks.com/articles/articleview.php?id=865).

Different versions of the dealer's ad ran in Kentucky and Minnesota and the UAW ad ran in Washington, D.C., according to the Campaign Media Analysis Group of TNS Media Intelligence, which featured them as its "Ad of the Week" for Dec. 15.

Obama get your gun?

The election of Barack Obama and the expansion of Democratic majorities in the House and Senate have spawned some misinformation spread by viral e-mails and bloggers. One is a fake quote in which Obama supposedly promised during his presidential campaign to seek "bans on all semi-automatic guns," a category that would include many common handguns, hunting rifles and shotguns. As we detailed in an Ask FactCheck item posted on Dec. 8, this claim is baseless and the quote is almost certainly fabricated.

It is also not true that Obama said he'd seek to create a Gestapo-like "civilian national security force," as claimed by Republican Rep. Paul Broun of Georgia shortly after the election. Broun said that's "exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it's exactly what the Soviet Union did." But it turns out, he was echoing misinformation that had been circulating for months on the Internet and through anonymous chain e-mails. It was a badly distorted version of Obama's call for doubling the Peace Corps, creating volunteer networks and increasing the size of the Foreign Service. Details are in an Ask FactCheck item we posted Nov. 11.

Democrats get your retirement?

As if the stock market's nose dive wasn't enough to worry about, some rumormongers were spreading a baseless claim that congressional Democrats were talking about confiscating IRA and 401(k) investment accounts. This falsehood was started by a Nov. 4 report posted by the Carolina Journal, a publication of the conservative John Locke Foundation of Raleigh, N.C. But as we reported in an Ask FactCheck item posted Nov. 19, the report was simply wrong. It was a twisted account of what one House witness actually had proposed – to allow some people to trade their old accounts for a new type that would be less risky, on a voluntary basis.

Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi continued to be a magnet for misinformed attacks. More than a year ago, we debunked a claim that she was advocating a "windfall" tax to take 100 percent of the profits of any stock sale. That claim, a fraud complete with a fabricated quote, is still listed in our "Hot Topics" section as among the claims that we're most frequently asked about.

But since the election, we've had many questions about other anti-Pelosi claims as well:

• She doesn't have routine use of a private 757-size jet. This misinformed claim was revived after Democrats ridiculed the chief executives of GM, Ford and Chrysler for flying to Washington on their own private jets when they first came begging for a taxpayer bailout. The truth is that Pelosi normally flies in the same type of 12-seat Air Force jet, a military version of the Gulfstream III, that was used by her Republican predecessor Dennis Hastert. For more, see the Ask FactCheck item posted Dec. 21 (http://factcheckcms.bootnetworks.com/articles/articleview.php?id=8650).

• Her wealthy husband does not, as widely claimed, have a $17 million stake in Del Monte foods. That bit of misinformation originated in a short-lived Wikipedia item that was quickly removed for lack of substantiation. And American Samoa never got the exemption from federal minimum-wage laws that Pelosi supposedly sought to aid Del Monte's StarKist tuna plant there. You can find all the details in our Nov. 26 Ask FactCheck item (http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_nancy_pelosi_get_wage_breaks_and.html).

Disinformation works

We wish we could say that all this disinformation is harmless, but there's evidence that a lot of people end up believing such nonsense.

In a FactCheck.org "Special Report" that we posted on Dec. 12, titled "Our Disinformed Electorate," we released some findings from a post-election poll taken by the National Annenberg Election Survey. It showed that millions of voters were bamboozled by false claims made by both sides in the 2008 presidential campaign.

More than half of those polled thought Obama's tax plan would raise taxes on most small businesses (a false claim made by Sen. John McCain) and more than two in five (42.3 percent) found truth in Obama's false claim that McCain planned to cut Medicare benefits.

Nevertheless, we'll keep blowing the whistle whenever we find political spin. Watch our Ask FactCheck space on the home page (www.factcheck.org) for items we'll soon be posting on claims that the EPA is proposing a pollution tax on cows and pigs (false) and a widely circulated e-mail quoting a law school professor giving "unreported stats" from the 2008 election. (The professor denies authorship, and the "statistics" are all wrong.)

And keep checking back in 2009. Because the spin never stops.

The Annenberg Political Fact Check is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. It is a nonpartisan, nonprofit "consumer advocate" for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics.

{mos_sb_discuss:4}