The strategy of using abortion-related keywords to send a woman searching the web for abortion information to a nearby crisis pregnancy center is already a few years old. But the scheme only received real national attention a couple of months ago, when Siri, Apple’s new voice-activated search assistant, was caught sending women looking for abortion clinics to centers that specialize in talking women out of abortions.

Apple refuted accusations of an anti-abortion agenda, instead blaming the “glitch” on search engines like Google and user-generated guides like Yelp, from which Siri largely extracts its information.

Apple’s explanation matched claims made by anti-abortion rights groups, whose websites describe in detail how they use keywords and Google ads to direct abortion seekers to a central website called Option Line, whose primary function is to route people to one of the thousands of crisis pregnancy centers throughout the country.

The Siri scandal sent The American Independent on a search for evidence that anti-abortion activists are successfully thwarting abortion searches on the Web. We found that CPCs have a minor presence online, but what’s telling is not so much the quantity of CPC ads that appeared on each front-page Google search, but the subtle, universal messaging these sites use.

In many cases, the presence of an anti-abortion agenda is masked.

Searching ‘abortion’

Like most businesses trying to boost their visibility on Google, anti-abortion pregnancy centers buy ads through Google’s AdWords program. But at the heart of the strategy appears to be CPC websites that not only share a universal message, but also a universal Web design.

Using various Google search approaches – “abortion,” “abortion services” “how can I get an abortion,” “I need an abortion” – TAI discovered at least one ad or entry that was linked to Option Line or to Option Line-created software on each primary search page.

These pages often also included two or three entries for individual crisis pregnancy centers or anti-abortion websites. One search result turned up a list of “abortion services” in the D.C. area that included anti-abortion pregnancy centers.

A Google ad that popped up frequently during our searches is “Thinking of Abortion?” whose URL is listed as assistcpc.org. The ad links to the website for Assist Pregnancy Center, a CPC in Annandale, Va. At the very bottom of the website is a note: “Website created by Optionline e-Xtend.” This links to Option Line Extend, a website development program that provides pregnancy centers with “a professional Internet presence.”

Another Google ad titled “Abortion Stories” links to the website standupgirl.com, whose domain is owned by Oregon Right to Life. The site is mainly devoted to promoting pregnancy and hosts an Option Line chat service on its homepage.

Option Line is a 24/7 live-operator contact center headquartered in Columbus, Ohio, which fields inquiries from people seeking information about abortion and pregnancy. It has a Spanish-only version at estasembarazada.com, staffed by bilingual consultants.

Option Line was co-founded in 2003 by Care Net and Heartbeat International, two of the three largest CPC networks in the U.S. About half of the more than 4,000 centers across the country are affiliated with one of these two networks.

In 2007, Option Line created Option Line Extend to sell to centers affiliated with either Care Net or Heartbeat International. CPCs are charged $150 for “basic websites,” $300 for “premium websites” and $500 for “ministry websites.”

Care Net, which made about $7 million in revenue in 2010, reported spending $600,000 on Option Line. Heartbeat International, which reported making about $1.4 million in revenue (PDF) in 2010, reported spending about 46 percent of its budget on its Option Line program between October 2010 and September 2011.

The Option Line Extend model websites are designed with calm colors and messaging, a departure from anti-abortion websites like AbortionNO.org (whose domain is owned by the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform), which links directly to a graphic video of a fetus being aborted.

Aside from live-chats and directions to the closest CPC, Option Line offers answers to questions about abortion, birth control and emergency contraception.

In an answer to the question, “Should I take the morning-after pill?” Option Line replies:

Many times women panic after having unprotected sex and rush to take the morning-after pill (Plan B One Step® or Next Choice®). However, you can only become pregnant on certain days of the month — around the time that you ovulate. Taking the morning-after pill during a time when you cannot become pregnant needlessly exposes you to large doses of hormones.

If you are already pregnant from an earlier sexual encounter, taking the morning-after pill is of no value and may cause harm6^, 7. To find out if you are pregnant, contact us, and we’ll connect you with a caring, qualified pregnancy center near you.

Questions about abortion are answered in similarly sober tones. Potential risks from abortion — often overstated by anti-abortion activists and CPC counselors — are stated here as what they are, potential risks. For example, while activists often argue that abortion is a direct cause of breast cancer, here the link is presented as uncertain. Option Line is also careful about putting disclaimers at the bottom of some of its pages, stating that its centers do not offer certain services, but this message is does not always appear on individual center sites.

Creating diversions on the Internet

According to a recently released updated report (PDF) on crisis pregnancy centers produced by the Family Research Council, Option Line averages about 1 million visitors per year and makes about 20,000 contracts per month, with media partners such as Heroic Media and Online for Life.

Last September, The American Independent reported that Heroic Media, an anti-abortion media group headquartered in Austin, Texas, was employing what’s known in the industry as “landing pages” or “doorway pages,” which Google defines as “poor-quality pages where each page is optimized for a specific keyword or phrase … written to rank a particular phrase and then funnel users to a single destination.”

The single destination where Heroic Media was trying to funnel users was Option Line’s homepage. Heroic Media’s parent company, Majella Cares, registered the Web domain freepreghelpline.com, which, when clicked on, goes to optionline.org/get-help.

Heroic Media discussed this strategy on its website when the Independent first reported the story.

This was an excerpt that we recorded from this page:

Internet keyword advertising is targeted and measureable. We can reach scared, abortion-vulnerable women with life-affirming messages and monitor effectiveness by the number of views, clicks, and visits to our site. We recently launched a new landing page at www.freepreghelpline.com to optimize reporting on just how many women are connected with life-affirming resources.

Keyword advertising on Google is also extremely cost-effective because you only pay for clicks, which cost an average of less than three dollars. That’s three dollars to connect abortion-vulnerable women with life-affirming information and people who can help.

A recent screenshot of the same web page we excerpted back in September shows that Heroic Media deleted the paragraph about freepreghelpline.com (also, the alleged amount of monthly “abortion” searches has jumped from 2 million to 6 million):

Screenshot from HeroicMedia.org, click to enlarge.

When asked if the organization is still using landing pages, Heroic Media spokesperson Marissa Gabrysch said the organization never used them.

“That’s inaccurate, although I understand why it was confusing,” Gabrysch told TAI in an email when asked about the doorway pages. “I have made the clarification on our website. Heroic Media’s keyword ads for Option Line link directly to optionline.org.

“The freepreghelpline.com site has not been advertised through keyword ads,” she continued.

“The county is taking steps that if he gets out, we will file a civil matter to make sure he takes his medications,” Ghosh told The American Independent.

Ghosh was speaking of the Comstock Park man who turned himself in to Grand Rapids police Dec. 22, alleging he attempted to infect hundreds of people with HIV through unprotected sex and sharing needles. He was placed in a psychiatric hold for two days, and on Dec. 24, he was arraigned on the first of two charges of failing to disclose his status to a sex partner. Several days later, prosecutors added a second charge of failing to disclose. He is currently in Ypsilanti undergoing a psychiatric evaluation to determine if he can stand trial. He is being held on a $100,000 bond.

TAI does not identify the names of those charged with HIV disclosure laws unless both the accused and the accuser are named in court documents, or one or both provide TAI permission to publish their names.

The case, media releases and subsequent reporting have resulted in what experts have told TAI were “sensationalist” reports in the wider media.

But this is the first time county officials have indicated plans on how to deal with the man if he is released on bond.

The announcement, however, has HIV advocates worried.

“Forcing anyone to take treatment is a slippery slope,” said Sean Strub, co-chair of the Global Network of People with AIDS, North America (GNP+), in an email. “This person’s most important health issue seems to be his mental health, not his viral status. Forcing anti-retroviral treatment on anyone is a slippery slope. Once the camel’s nose gets inside that tent, even in such a rare and bizarre circumstance as this peculiar case, it is not such a huge step to mandatory testing and treatment for an ever-expanding number of people with HIV.”

While the advent of antiretroviral medications in the mid-1990s resulted in a staggering revival of persons living with AIDS and s sharp decrease in AIDS-related deaths, the drugs themselves are quite toxic and cause a host of side effects. In addition, scientists are not in agreement as to when is the appropriate point in clinical progression to begin treatment, resulting in many mixed messages to patients.

Michigan does have a part of the state health code that allows health officials to declare a person a health threat to others (HTTO). HTTOs are a civil action and can amount to anything from counseling to forced civil confinement for as long as six months. TAI reported in December that many people thought the law was being abused when it was revealed that any HIV-positive person who was diagnosed with a sexually transmitted infection was immediately issued an HTTO. In other instances, women who became pregnant were issued HTTO orders and HIV-positive people who were named in partner services programs were also targeted for HTTO orders. The state, which oversees the HTTO list, denies pregnant women were targeted but said the STI and partner services programs were appropriate uses of the state’s name-based HIV list.

“[The suspect] does not have an airborne disease spread through casual contact; he has a disease that, regardless of treatment, is not easily transmitted. Even without treatment, the primary routes of infection — unprotected anal or vaginal sex — result in HIV transmission roughly one percent or less of the time,” said Catherine Hanssens, executive director of the Center for HIV Law and Policy. “So the threat of mandatory treatment is not a reflection of any danger [the suspect] poses, but of Ms.Ghosh’s dangerous misapprehension of both HIV transmission and the law governing the very limited circumstances under which treatment of an individual can be mandated.”

Photo: Kent County, Mich. logo (www.accesskent.com)

In spite of the national condemnation, local media and the Kent County Health Department are standing by their reporting.

“In this extreme case, the challenge becomes to look beyond the sensational and focus on information that would be helpful to the public,” said Colette Seguin Beighley, a Grand Rapids resident and board member of the LGBT-advocacy group Equality Michigan, in an email to The American Independent. ”What may be most helpful would be to use this as an opportunity to provide information about the different ways HIV is transmitted along with accompanying infection rates. … It would also resist feeding into hysteria which vilifies and victimizes HIV+ people.”

While nearly every media outlet that has written or reported about this case has identified the Comstock Park man by name, it is TAI’s policy not to identify those alleged to be living with HIV in criminal matters such as disclosure cases, unless they are convicted or the individuals pursuing charges are identified by name either in interviews, court documents, or other publications or reports.

The background

Grand Rapids Police allege the man walked into their station on Dec. 22, 2011, and told detectives he was turning himself in for attempting to infect hundreds of people with HIV by sharing needles and having unprotected sex with them. Police claim he admitted to wanting to kill people with the virus.

The man was placed in psychiatric observation while police investigated his claims. On Dec. 24, he was arraigned on one felony count of the state’s HIV disclosure law. That 1988 law makes it a crime for a person with HIV to engage in sexual penetration, “however slight,” without first disclosing his or her HIV-positive status. On Dec. 28, police and prosecutors added a second disclosure-law felony. Officials say they expect to file more criminal charges as their investigation continues.

This was not the man’s first trip to psychiatric observation and care, nor would it be his last. Earlier in 2011, he was ordered by a court to a 90-day commitment to facility. On Tuesday, the court sent him to a state-run criminal psychiatric hospital in Ypsilanti, Mich., for evaluation on his mental fitness to stand trial.

Why the man was ordered to be hospitalized in 2011 is unclear, and health officials refuse to say, claiming they do not want to violate the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).

The press release

Following word of the arraignment on the first charge, the Kent County Health Department issued a press release (PDF), which was presented as a ‘Health Alert’ without noting that the health department has no actual legal authority to make such a declaration.

That release, experts interviewed by The American Independent say, was the source of the sensationalism in reporting.

“My concern with the press release distributed by the Kent County Health Department is its use of the term ‘victim,’ said Michigan Positive Action Coalition (MI-POZ) director Mark Peterson in an email. “This assumes the continuing criminalization of an individual who has HIV. Neither the press release or anything else I’ve read in the media about this case so far has asked if [the suspect's] partners asked him about his HIV status or knew or disclosed their own HIV or STI status.”

Peterson also expressed concerns that the press release failed to address transmission probabilities in a clear and concise way. While the press release noted that transmission rates vary based on which activity is involved, it failed to note exactly how low those probabilities are.

A 2011 Journal of AIDS study by Julie Fox et al. found that the highest probability of infection in a one-time sexual encounter with an HIV-positive person was 1.4 percent for receptive anal intercourse. The Center for HIV Law & Policy has created a comparative chart of infection probabilities comparing HIV, herpes, human papillomavirus (HVP), and gonorrhea. HPV and gonorrhea have staggeringly high transmission rates. HPV — which has been linked to several forms of cancer, including cervical, penile, throat, mouth and anal cancer — has a risk between 43 percent and 93 percent, while gonorrhea has a 25 percent to 50 percent transmission rate. Herpes’ transmission rates, however, are below a 10th of 1 percent, similar to most exposures to HIV.

Ignoring these realities about AIDS and HIV, Peterson said, feeds common misinformation about the disease.

“I think there are two important issues at play here in the media coverage thus far: the lack of concrete information about exactly how infectious HIV is, resulting in wild speculation and implication by media that everyone he contacted got infected, and this case highlights the lack of knowledge in the general public and from the media concerning HIV transmission, as well as feed the assumption that people living with HIV in general, are negligently transmitting HIV to others,” Peterson said.

He also told TAI that several studies have found that those living with HIV who know of their status are unlikely to be the source of new infections. Those studies, Peterson said, were written by Dr. David R. Holtgrave of Johns Hopkins University and a member of the Presidential Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS (PACHA). In those reports, Holtgrave said infections caused by those who know they are living with the virus represent only 2 percent of the total new infections. Meanwhile, the 20 to 25 percent of Americans living with the virus and unaware of their infection are responsible for the remaining 98 percent of new infections.

“Hysterical, inaccurate reporting feeds hysteria and stigma against people with HIV,” said Beirne Roose-Snyder, an attorney with the Center for HIV Law & Policy. “The characterizations of HIV in the news articles and the press release encourage a view of individuals with HIV as toxic, irresponsible and predatory.”

The media frenzy

Activists told TAI that this poorly formed press release, which they say provided little factual information, resulted in a flurry of sensational reports. The Global Grind called the suspect “a total monster,” while in an interview with WOOD TV 8, NBC’s Grand Rapids affiliate, one anonymous woman who claimed the suspect infected her with HIV in 2008 called him a “sociopath” and “predator.” The headline from the Grand Rapids Press’ coverage of the man’s preliminary hearing is “Psychiatric exam slated for [name of suspect redacted] who is accused of intentionally spreading AIDS.” In a national blog written by an expert in criminal issues, the man is referred to as a “serial murder.”

In the interview with WOOD TV 8, the woman who alleged the suspect infected her in June 2008 was not challenged about her accusation, nor was she asked basic questions about the sexual encounter with the man (did she ask about his disease status? did she ask that he use a condom? had she previously engaged in risky behaviors, such as unprotected sex or sharing needles?). The WOOD interviewer noted — and did not challenge — the woman’s charge that the suspect told her he had attempted to infect as many as 3,000 people. The reporter did not question this allegation, in light of the suspect’s mental health issues, nor did he ask why the woman had not come forward in October 2008, when she was diagnosed, or later when he allegedly told her about his plan to infect people. The reporter also failed to note that determining direction of infection (who infected whom) is not scientifically possible.

The woman’s claims that the man attempted to infect 3,000 people were then used in subsequent reporting by the television station. But Grand Rapids Police and court documents say the suspect told police he tried to infect “hundreds” of people.

This kind of media coverage, activists say, increases stigma against those living with HIV.

“Is the coverage stigmatizing? Of course it is,” said Peter Kronenberg, communications director of the National Association of People With AIDS, in an email. “It doesn’t acknowledge that [suspect's name redacted] campaign to infect as many people as possible is way out in the ‘alpha tail’ of aberrant behavior, and that leaves readers (many of whom already have hang-ups about minority sexual orientation and HIV as a ‘gay’ disease) free to conclude that this is how all people with HIV behave. The only story we’ve seen so far that even mentions [suspect's name redacted] confinement for psychiatric evaluation is (here). The news coverage also fails to remind readers that it is the responsibility of both partners in a sexual act (or drug sharing) to protect themselves. With partners who know each other well, that means saying, I’m HIV-(positive/negative), what about you? With partners who don’t, it means assuming nothing, no matter what is asked or what is answered, and using condoms. Just because (s)he says (s)he’s negative doesn’t mean it’s true. Too many people don’t know their status, and some, regrettably, lie – out of fear of rejection.”

Sean Strub, co-chair of the Global Network of People with HIV/AIDS North America (GNP+), told TAI that this type of media coverage actually perpetuates the fear of HIV-positive people to disclose their status. A Kaiser Family Foundation report released in June of 2011 found that six in 10 Americans get their HIV information from news reports. That, activists say, is the reason the “sensationalist” reporting is particularly damning to HIV-prevention, -intervention and -care efforts.

“The media coverage makes those who truly fear they might have HIV more reluctant to find out, as it underscores the stigma, and it definitely makes it tougher for people who know they have HIV to disclose,” Strub said.

“Sensationalist reporting about HIV criminalization cases, including this one, are a serious hindrance to good HIV education,” said attorney Roose-Snyder. “It greatly skews the truth about how, how easily, and by whom most HIV is transmitted, since 1) most HIV transmission takes place during consensual sex between two adults who do not know their HIV status; 2) once most people know they are HIV positive they typically reduce their sexual risk-taking behaviors; and 3) most HIV-positive people who are aware of their status do not want to – and in fact do not – transmit HIV.”

Of concern for many of the activists TAI talked to was that the suspect’s mental health issues were barely, if ever, mentioned in the reporting. And the Kent County Health Department is holding the specifics of what illness the man is suffering from as a tightly guarded secret.

When asked why she failed to note the mental health issues in her press release or subsequent public comments, Kent County communications director Lisa LaPlante cited HIPAA concerns. When asked why revealing mental health information about the suspect was a violation of HIPAA but revealing his HIV status was not, LaPlante told TAI,”[His] HIV status was disclosed as two criminal charges, therefore a component of the press release.”

But the suspect’s two-day confinement in a psychiatric hospital following his alleged admissions was also part of the news, somewhat nullifying LaPlante’s HIPAA claims, activists say.

“The public fears people with HIV more than they fear people with mental health issues; in this circumstance it seems like the media and public health authorities are responding or playing to the public’s fear and biases rather than the real underlying issue with this individual,” Strub said. “Understanding mental health issues is more nuanced and complicated; it is far easier to play into the hysteria, ignorance and fear engendered by HIV.”

“While it’s hard to imagine what the motivation of any story is from a legal standpoint of the criminal case, it is common for one side to leak only that information which is beneficial to the case,” said Joshua Moore, an attorney who runs Detroit Legal Services, an HIV legal specialty clinic. “Here it would be beneficial for a prosecutor to have information leaked that did not include [the suspect's] mental illness so that the community would be biased towards his case.”

Sex vs. syringes

Also of concern with the reporting, from the standpoint of HIV/AIDS, is the focus on sexual exposure. The suspect allegedly told police he shared needles and had sex in an attempt to infect as many people as possible.

“Why does sex feature prominently in the story as reported and not the needle-sharing?” Kronenberg said. “HIV disease’s strange negative glamour comes directly from its having shown up first in gay men. The mixed fascination and repulsion some people feel about same-sex sexuality says a lot more about them than it does about gay people. Sex sells newspapers; if you haven’t seen it already, have a look at the coverage in the UK’s online tabloid Mail Online. This is the Mail Online’s kind of story.”

“My assumption here is that the issue of sex, especially anonymous sex via online interactions is more salacious then syringe-sharing,” said Peterson of MI-POZ. “It speaks more to our obsession with sex than it does our understanding of public health.”

Fittingly, Michigan’s HIV disclosure law does not require an HIV-positive person to disclose his or her status when sharing needles with someone. The focus on sexual transmission led then-state Sen. Hansen Clarke (D-Detroit) to tell the Michigan Messenger the current law “hasn’t been able to protect the public.”

Standing by the reports

The American Independent sent requests for comment to WOOD TV 8, the Kent County Health Department, and the Grand Rapids Press.

WOOD TV 8 News Director Rebecca Sapakie issued the following statement about her station’s news coverage of the case:

WOOD TV is proud of its in-depth reporting on this issue. When we first heard about the case, we contacted police, prosecutors and the health department to expand our perspective on the story. We used comments from the suspect himself to police, investigators, official court documents, victims and the health department to frame our stories. As we uncovered new facts, we followed the story in the days beyond our initial reports. News stories frequently deal with the unusual or rare cases. We pride ourselves in giving perspective to these stories and offering our viewers important information. This was a case where public officials believed it was appropriate to alert the public given the known facts. We are confident with our reporting on this story and we’ll continue to follow it if new developments are discovered.

Grand Rapids Press Editor Paul Keep did not respond to several emails seeking comment.

Bonnie Bucqueroux, a journalism professor at Michigan State University and former director of the Victims and the Media Project there, said she thinks criticism of the reporting is unfounded.

“I am always willing to criticize the press when I think they deserve it,” she told TAI. “I think most did a pretty good job.”

Lisa LaPlante from the Kent County Health Department said she stands by her press release and sees no need to revise it. She also added that the press has had an impact on testing for HIV.

“I feel confident that the information provided in the news release has been helpful to the community, as we have seen an uptick in free, confidential, anonymous client testing for HIV since [the suspect's] arrest,” she said.

But activists say the uptick is unlikely to be helpful in actually addressing the HIV epidemic in Kent County and beyond.

“No, an increase in testing does nothing if the community as a whole is ignorant to the disease itself,” said attorney Moore. “There are many individuals out in the community that I work with every day who are scarred to death that a family member or church member finds out their infected with HIV. These types of reports only feed that fear and stigma. The fear and stigma often prevent people living with HIV from getting the proper education themselves. The media has a responsibility to cover these types of stories with balance and offer a means for individuals in the public to get educated.”

Photo: Kent County, Mich. logo (www.accesskent.com)

Kent County Press Release December 27, 2011

The 5-2 Montana ruling flies in the face of the landmark 2010 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. the Federal Elections Commission. That ruling by a 5-4 margin in 2010 blocked the government from limiting spending by corporations and unions for political purposes, as long as that spending is independent and not coordinated with campaigns.

The Montana Supreme Court (Photo: mt.gov)

Montana Supreme Court Chief Justice Mike McGrath, writing for the majority, argued that the sprawling western Rocky Mountain state passed its law to limit the undue influence of “mining and industrial enterprises controlled by foreign trusts or corporations.” He referenced the state’s “Copper Kings” who used to buy politicians and state officials.

“The question then, is when in the last 99 years did Montana lose the power or interest sufficient to support the statute, if it ever did. If the statute has worked to preserve a degree of political and social autonomy is the State required to throw away its protections?” McGrath wrote.

Some observers welcome the opportunity to re-open the debate and compel the U.S. Supreme Court to rule again on the issue.

“If they take it up, there will be a new opportunity to push forward all the arguments as to why the court got it wrong,” John Bonifaz of Free Speech for People told Politico, adding that if they reaffirm their prior decision, “that will only fuel the efforts further to allow a constitutional amendment.”

A Slate analysis on Wednesday offered this take on the Montana ruling:

“Western Tradition Partnership, the lead plaintiff in the case, merits extra special scorn from the court for circulating a fundraising brochure that said, ‘If you decide to support this program, no politician, no bureaucrat, and no radical environmentalist will ever know you made this program possible.’ The majority openly accuses WTP of being responsible for ‘a multi-front attack on both contribution restrictions and the transparency that accompanies campaign disclosure requirements.’”

The question of who’s funding American Tradition Partnership, which was called Western Tradition Partnership when it first challenged the Montana law in 2010, dates back to 2008 when the group was first registered as a 501(c)4 nonprofit in Colorado by Republic political operative Scott Shires.

The group was later re-registered by an attorney for the Denver law firm of Hackstaff Gessler, which is the former firm of current Republican Colorado Secretary of State Scott Gessler, a conservative election campaign lawyer who in the past represented Shires in various campaign finance violation cases.

Ferguson last summer flew out to Montana – at his own expense, he said – to counter community and environmental outrage in the wake of an ExxonMobil oil pipeline spill in the Yellowstone River.

Besides the corporate spending case, ATP is involved in other litigation challenging Montana campaign disclosure laws. The Montana Commissioner of Political Practices in 2010 found that WTP’s anonymous campaign fliers attacking Democrats and moderate Republicans “raised the specter of corruption” and merited formal action by the state’s attorney general.

That case is being heard by the same judge, District Judge Jeffrey Sherlock of Helena, who ruled in favor of WTP in the corporate spending case just overturned by the Montana Supreme Court.

A trial in that case has been set for March 19, according to John Doran, a spokesman for the Montana Department of Justice, who adds that the case essentially boils down to whether 501(c)4’s (named for a section of the IRS tax code) are educational organizations or political committees.

“The State of Montana contends they are political committees subject to state disclosure and disclaimer laws, and that they’ve spent hundreds of thousands of dollars secretly in Montana to influence Montana elections,” Doran said in an email. “They are arguing they are educational organizations that don’t need to disclose anything to the state.”

Colorado lawmakers are watching closely after WTP sent out fliers in a tight state Senate race in 2010 that prompted calls for tougher campaign disclosure laws for 501(c)4 nonprofits.

Photo: Flickr Creative Commons/www.BackgroundNow.com

Bobby Joe Rogers (Photo: escambiaso.com)

Police announced on Thursday that they have made an arrest following a fire at a Pensacola area abortion clinic early Sunday morning.

After a joint investigation involving the Division of State Fire Marshal’s Bureau of Fire and Arson Investigations and other members of the Joint Terrorism Task Force, officers determined that Bobby Joe Rogers of Tuscaloosa, Ala., set fire to the clinic, causing approximately $300,000 in damage.

The same clinic has been the site of numerous protests and controversies for nearly 30 years. In fact, the American Family Planning Clinic was also the site of a 1984 bombing and the 1994 murder of abortion practitioner Dr. John Britton.

The doctor, along with a volunteer who escorted patients to and from the clinic, were shot to death as they arrived at the clinic in July 1994. At the time, the clinic was known as the Pensacola Ladies Center. The gunman, Paul Hill, was executed in 2003.

On Christmas Eve 1984, two 21-year-old men placed a bomb in a crawl space beneath the bottom floor of the center. The men also detonated bombs at two other Florida abortion clinics on the same night. The fiancée of one of the men later explained to reporters that the bombs were to be “a gift to Jesus on His birthday.”

Last year’s legislative session saw numerous bills targeting abortion in the state, and this year likely won’t be much different. When lawmakers reconvene next week to begin their annual session, they’ll find no less than seven bills dealing with abortion.

No one was hurt during the Sunday morning fire, which began around 1 a.m.; a preliminary investigation found that the fire began outside the clinic.

According to a press release, “members of the community came forward with information that ultimately led to the arrest of Rogers, who is being held at the Escambia County Jail pending a federal indictment by the U.S. Attorney’s Office.” Rogers could face up to 20 years in prison.

The bill to extend payroll tax cuts and extend unemployment benefits is part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2012, H.R. 3671, a $1 trillion dollar omnibus spending bill that funds several federal government departments, including Defense and Homeland Security.

The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday that “the House voted Tuesday to scuttle a deal brokered in the Senate to extend the payroll-tax holiday and federal unemployment insurance for two months.”

The Journal adds that the “vote leaves Congress at a familiar impasse, just days after a final deal seemed to be in sight. Senate leaders reached an agreement late last week to extend for two months the payroll-tax cut, federal unemployment benefits and a measure to reimburse doctors for treating Medicare patients.”

The 2012 Appropriations Act includes funding that raises the number of immigration detention beds to about 34,000.

The final Fiscal Year 2012 Appropriations 1,200-page bill package includes “a total of $39.6 billion in regular discretionary funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) – a decrease of $2 billion below last year’s level and $4 billion below the President’s request.”

According to a detailed summary (.pdf), “the bill provides $5.9 billion for [Immigrations and Customs Enforcement], which is $50 million more than last year’s level. This includes funding for 34,000 detention beds – the largest detention capacity in ICE’s history – and increases in immigration enforcement activities.”

Residents of Pembroke Pines and the town of Southwest Ranches are opposed to the federally funded and privately managed detention center set to be built in South Florida.

The 2012 Appropriations Act also includes $11.7 billion for U.S. Customs and Border Protection, “an increase of $362 million over last year’s level.”

Photo: An Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer (ice.gov)

The Supreme Court announced today that its hearings in the lawsuit challenging the new federal health care reform law will begin on March 26 and will last three days.

Florida is leading the legal challenge to the Affordable Care Act, a suit that includes 25 other states. State officials have argued that the alleged unconstitutionality of the individual mandate is grounds for striking the bill in its entirety. That argument has not been upheld in lower court decisions.

Both parties have worked actively to make sure that the Supreme Court is able to reach its decision before the 2012 presidential election.

The Wall Street Journal reports that the “main part” of the hearing “will take place on Tuesday, March 27, with a two-hour argument over the minimum-coverage provision, which starting in 2014 will require most Americans to carry health insurance.”

The Supreme Court seal (Photo: Wikimedia Commons/Hayfordoleary)

Spanish-language news reporters who spoke Sunday on Al Punto, a Univision program, said the coming Supreme Court decision on Arizona’s immigration enforcement law S.B. 1070 will have an impact on both the 2012 elections and on the lives of millions of immigrants.

Alan Rivera of Hispanic News Network said that the Supreme Court decision that would come in June, in the midst of the 2012 presidential campaign, and will greatly influence the Obama campaign against the eventual Republican nominee.

Rivera highlighted the fact that, with Justice Elena Kagan not voting, five of the remaining eight justices were selected by Republican administrations. He also said the immigration issue is a constitutional one, and “the court cannot decide against the Constitution,” adding that “the Constitution says that Congress decides” on legislative issues.

Marcello Raimon of Agencia ANSA — a Latin-American news agency — said “we have to wait with our fingers crossed,” hoping “that the Supreme Court does not decide to allow states to do what they want.”

“It is on the conscience of the justices if they will destroy the lives of millions of people,” Raimon said.

“I find it very interesting that instead of talking about immigration reform for 11 million undocumented immigrants, the anti-immigrant environment in the U.S. is so large we’re talking about these issues,” Al Punto host Jorge Ramos said.

The Supreme Court decision to hear the legal challenge to Arizona’s controversial immigration enforcement law comes at a time when the leading GOP presidential candidates are talking about immigration and trying to strengthen support with Latino voters.

Newt Gingrich has called for a “humane” approach to immigration enforcement, and Republicans share his approach to immigration, but the GOP still has to work hard to get Latino voters in important swing states in the 2012 presidential elections, according to surveys.

ABC News reported that Mitt Romney, during the Fox News debate last week, “laid out more clearly than he has before details of a proposed national ID card system for legal immigrants and the requirement that employers run checks on workers or face ‘very serious sanctions.’”

According to ABC, “Romney said the new protocols would add pressure on illegal immigrants to voluntarily return to their native countries and force them to apply to the U.S. from the ‘back of the line.’”

The Washington Post reported Friday:

Republicans are increasingly worried that their party’s efforts to win a competitive slice of the fast-growing Hispanic vote in important presidential battleground states are being undermined by Mitt Romney’s heated rhetoric on illegal immigration.

Several leading GOP strategists say Romney’s sharp-tongued attacks have gained wide attention in Hispanic media and are eroding the party’s already fragile standing in that community.

The Post adds that  leaders of  conservative groups like the Hispanic Leadership Fund and the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles do not agree with Romney on immigration.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio (Photo: Flickr/Gage Skidmore)

Homeland Security writes:

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is troubled by the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) findings of discriminatory policing practices within the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO). Discrimination undermines law enforcement and erodes the public trust. DHS will not be a party to such practices. Accordingly, and effective immediately, DHS is terminating MCSO’s 287(g) jail model agreement and is restricting the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office access to the Secure Communities program. DHS will utilize federal resources for the purpose of identifying and detaining those individuals who meet U.S. Immigration Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) immigration enforcement priorities. The Department will continue to enforce federal immigration laws in Maricopa County in smart, effective ways that focus our resources on criminal aliens, recent border crossers, repeat and egregious immigration law violators and employers who knowingly hire illegal labor.

A Department of Justice report released Thursday found that Arpaio, an advocate for controversial immigration enforcement and detention measures, has committed a “wide range of civil rights violations.”

The Department of Justice states that the ongoing civil rights investigation of the Arpaio’s office found “reasonable cause to believe that MCSO, under the leadership of Sheriff Joseph M. Arpaio, has engaged in a pattern or practice of misconduct that violates the Constitution and federal law.”

“We are pleased the Department of Justice report compelled the Department of Homeland Security to take steps today that should have been taken years ago,” said Chris Newman, Legal Director of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network in a written statement.

The Network adds:

As the DOJ report implies, DHS was an accomplice in the rights violations caused by Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. DHS enabled Sheriff Arpaio to conduct his reign of terror, and expansion of the Maricopa Sheriff’s approach led to SB 1070 and to the potential Arizonification of the country. Today, the Department of Justice again acted to clean up the mess caused by failed DHS policies that enlist local police into the business of enforcing unjust immigration laws. It is time for DHS to stop contributing to the civil rights crisis described in the DOJ report and end the programs that made Arpaio’s crimes possible.”

The National Immigration Forum writes that the “Justice Department findings confirm what the American public had already suspected: Sheriff Arpaio has been more concerned with headlines than the Constitution and the law,” adding that they “also hail Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano’s prompt termination of the MCSO’s 287g agreement, which delegates authority for immigration enforcement to local officials, and restriction of the MCSO’s access to the Secure Communities program.”

Immigrant advocates across the U.S. have denounced Secure Communities, a highly controversial federal immigration enforcement program critics say contributes to racial profiling, demanding that the Obama administration terminate the program immediately.

Photo: Sheriff Joe Arpaio (Flickr/Gage Skidmore)

Sheriff Joe Arpaio (Photo: Flickr/Gage Skidmore)

A federal report released Thursday finds that Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Ariz., an advocate for controversial immigration enforcement and detention measures, has committed a “wide range of civil rights violations.”

The Associated Press reports:

The federal government issued a scathing report Thursday that outlines how Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s office has committed a wide range of civil rights violations against Latinos, including a pattern of racial profiling and discrimination and carrying out heavy-handed immigration patrols based on racially charged citizen complaints.

The report, obtained by The Associated Press ahead of its release, is a result of the U.S. Justice Department’s three-year investigation of Arpaio’s office amid complaints of racial profiling and a culture of bias at the agency’s top level.

The AP adds that federal authorities will continue to investigate, among other complaints, “a large number of sex-crimes cases that were assigned to” Arpaio’s office “but weren’t followed up on or investigated at all.”

In a press release issued Thursday, the Department of Justice states that the ongoing civil rights investigation of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office found “reasonable cause to believe that MCSO, under the leadership of Sheriff Joseph M. Arpaio, has engaged in a pattern or practice of misconduct that violates the Constitution and federal law.”

The department found

a pattern or practice of unconstitutional conduct and/or violations of federal law occurred in several areas, including:

• Discriminatory policing practices including unlawful stops, detentions and arrests of Latinos;
• Unlawful retaliation against individuals exercising their First Amendment right to criticize MCSO’s policies or practices, including but not limited to practices relating to its discriminatory treatment of Latinos; and
• Discriminatory jail practices against Latino inmates with limited English proficiency by punishing them and denying them critical services.

Arpaio has said he trains his deputies with federal immigration officials, has the largest group of cross-certified law enforcement men and women (160 of them) and proudly talks about his “tent city,” where about 2,000 detainees live “in Korean War tents” and “sleep in bunk beds, 20 to a tent.”

Asked what he would do if the Supreme Court decides to strike down Arizona’s immigration enforcement law S.B. 1070, Arapio said on CNN this week:

It doesn’t change anything. I do like certain parts of that new law, but I’ll tell you one thing, we’ve been doing it under two other state laws. We have two other state laws, one is the employer sanction that the Supreme Court ruled in our favor. So, it’s not going to change anything I’m doing, regardless of what that decision is.

Arapaio endorsed GOP presidential candidate Rick Perry in late November, saying Perry “has done more to combat illegal immigration and secure the border than any other candidate in the Republican presidential field.”