This summer, more and more Americans find themselves thinking twice before taking road trips because of gas prices. According to a national study conducted by WNBC/Marist College, 63% of Americans plan to take a summer vacation but gas prices are one factor in the plans they are making.

After hearing a friend complain about being ‘violated’ every time she went to fill her tank, Andrew Noakes wrote 101 Ways to Beat the Gas Pump. A former car dealership owner and collector and restorer of classic cars, Noakes shares ways drivers can save big money in gas expenses each year. Noakes shares tips for drivers, such as:

* Drive barefoot!
* Buy your gas during the coolest hours of the day
* Use your cruise control
* Do not purchase gas from a station that has just had its tanks refilled
* Keep the windows and sun roofs up

LEGISLATORS OPPOSE NEW 911 PHONE TAX HIKE BY STATE AGENCY

AUSTIN—July 15, 2008 -- Two Texas state legislators today called on the state agency that manages the 911 system statewide to discontinue collection of a monthly tax it has imposed on pre-paid cell phones used by hundreds of thousands of low-income, elderly and rural consumers in the state.

Last month the Commission on State Emergency Communications voted in a controversial and heavily criticized move to apply a monthly tax of $.50 to every purchase of a prepaid cell phone or prepaid minutes.

The Texas Consumer Association and the Gray Panthers of Texas registered their strong objections to the Commission’s action, stating that many older Texans and low-income residents rely upon the affordable prepaid phones to stay connected to family members and to seek and maintain employment. The groups are concerned that any increase in cost, in these difficult economic times, may adversely affect these vulnerable Texans.

State Rep. Eddie Rodriguez of Austin and State Rep. Rafael Anchia of Dallas have joined the grassroots groups in opposition to the new tax.

“I strongly urge the CSEC, at its July Board meeting, to consider repealing this fee as it applies to prepaid phone use until the Legislature can consider a more equitable solution to the problem,” wrote Rep. Rodriguez. He further noted in his letter that his “district includes a significant number of low income residents who face daily challenges such as paying for escalating gas and food costs.”

Rep. Anchia, in his letter to the Commission, stated, “Since the legislation was enacted, the use of prepaid phones has greatly increased among low income and elderly Texans. Many of these residents are living on a limited or fixed income and are struggling in today’s challenging economy.” He continued, “I hope the CSEC will refrain from collecting this fee from prepaid cell phone users.”

The Commission is scheduled to meet in Austin, Texas on Friday, July 25th to further consider the new tax on prepaid cell phones.

Let’s Talk: Cell Phone Early Termination Fees up for Debate

Angie’s List advises current customers to speak up early to get what may only be offered to new customers

It’s looking like the beginning of the end for those triple-digit early termination fees that have trapped consumers in cell phone contracts or required them to shell out hundreds of dollars to get out early. Two of the biggest cell phone companies have already started scaling back termination fees, two others are preparing to, and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is also on the job.

But consumers shouldn’t get too excited just yet, cautions Angie Hicks, founder of Angie’s List, (www.angieslist.com), the nation’s leading consumer rating service.

“These early termination changes would only affect new customers,” Hicks said. “Current customers who are facing early termination fees will need to be smart negotiators if they want to get a break.”

The FCC met June 12 to discuss an industry-sponsored proposal that would give new cell phone customers a 30-day grace period to cancel their contracts without penalty. After those 30 days, early termination charges would be pro-rated over the life of the contract. Pro-rated billing would result in customers paying much less to terminate a contract in its 20th month as compared, for example, to its 4th month of service. The termination fee proposal comes as cell phone companies are facing class-action lawsuits that claim the early termination fees are unfair. If the FCC approves the proposal, those lawsuits could be dismissed.

“Sometimes you can’t negotiate your way out of early termination fees, but it’s definitely worth a shot – especially with these changes underway,” Hicks said. “The worst thing that can happen is the company won’t budge. But if you keep your cool and plead a good case, you could undo the contract you’re in and get a fresh start.”

Angie’s List Tips to avoid paying a full termination fee:

* Know your contract: Understand what you've signed up for, so you can negotiate out of it. Have your contract with you when you approach the company and quote from it to bolster your position – especially if you didn’t get all the service the contract promised.
* Shop the competition: Determine what other providers are offering and use that as leverage. Even if you have to pay a termination fee, you may be able to save overall by jumping ship.
* Start with the Customer Service Department: Lay out your case for why you want to end your contract early. Be specific about what you signed up for and outline what you haven’t gotten (if that’s the case.)
* If necessary, go to the top: If the representative insists that you must pay the full termination fee, remind him/her of the actions the FCC and some providers are taking. If you still don’t get anywhere, ask for a manager and lay out your case again.
* Ask for customer retention department: If you have a good payment record with the company, ask to speak with the Customer Retention Department and lay out your case one more time. If you have a good record, the Retention Department will work hard to keep you as a customer, possibly forgiving the termination fees altogether and offering you a better deal.

###

Angie’s List is where thousands of consumers share their ratings and reviews on local service providers in more than 330 different categories. Currently, more than 650,000 consumers across the U.S. rely on Angie’s List to help them find the right professional for the job they need done. Members have unlimited access to the list via Internet or phone; receive the award-winning Angie’s List magazine, which includes articles on home improvement and maintenance, consumer trends and scam alerts. Get more information about Angie’s List at http://www.angieslist.com. Read Angie’s blog at http://www.angiehicksblog.com.

By Kathryn Howell

Exciting, unbelievable at times, sometimes very sad. The past few months in my new job, police reporter for The Tribune, have been a whirlwind of activity, to say the least. In my very first days, I covered some bizarre things – from skull bongs to burglaries to stabbings to carjackings. I've had the opportunity to see how the “big guys” work – the camera crews from the Big 4 news stations. Amazing thing about the camera operators. At one news conference, I asked a “camera guy”, “why are we here, again?” My meaning was, why do you think that this (particular incident) is news. The camera guy answered in a somewhat bored tone, “we're here because Channel so-and-so got here first.”

Ah ha! My first lesson in what makes something newsworthy, from an insiders point of view! He, of course, was correct. My job is to find out what is happening in our community and report it to you. Being somewhat naive when I first started, I really had never given much thought about how newspapers get their stories. Many leads, I know, are phoned in – particularly when community events are involved. But for what we call “hard” news stories, the ones that involve murders, robberies, or drug busts, I have to rely on the community, for the most part, in letting me know what they hear or see! The police, in general, don't call reporters when crime happens. The second week into my job, I went to Radio Shack and bought a scanner, which my good friend programmed for me. I take it everywhere that I can, and have picked up some amazing things – but I can't have it on all of the time. That's why I rely on community involvement for my reporting.

A few days ago, my best friend asked me what the most important thing that I have learned from this job. My answer was simple. I have gained an enormous amount of respect for the law enforcement officers that put their lives on the line everyday to keep us safe. I hear what they do and the frightening situations that they get involved in on my scanner all of the time. They are doing their job, yes, but the officers that I have met have a deep, personal commitment to make a difference – and that, is from an insiders view.

HOUSE DEMS WHO CHANGED THEIR VOTE TO SUPPORT FISA BILL, GIVING IMMUNITY TO TELCOS, RECEIVED, ON AVERAGE, $8,359 IN PAC CONTRIBUTIONS FROM VERIZON, AT&T, AND SPRINT

BERKELEY, CA—Last week, on June 20, the House of Representatives approved a compromise bill to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA). The bill sets new electronic surveillance rules that effectively shield telecommunications companies from lawsuits resulting from the government’s warrantless eavesdropping on phone calls and viewing of emails of private citizens in the U.S. Approximately 40 lawsuits have been filed with potential damages totaling in the billions of dollars.

On March 14 of this year the House passed an amendment that rejected retroactive immunity for phone carriers who helped the National Security Agency carry out the illegal wiretapping program without proper warrants. Ninety-four House Democrats voted in favor of this measure--rejecting immunity--on March 14, then ‘changed’ to vote in favor of the June 20 House bill--approving immunity.

“Why did these ninety-four House members have a change of heart?” asked Daniel Newman, executive director of MAPLight.org, “Their constituents deserve answers.”

MAPLight.org's research department compiled PAC campaign contributions from Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint and correlated them with the voting records of all House members who voted on last week’s FISA bill. (The analysis used data from CRP; contributions were from January 2005 through March 2008). Here are the findings:

Comparing Democrats' Votes (March 14th and June 20th votes):

Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint gave PAC contributions averaging:

$8,359 to each Democrat who changed their position to support immunity for Telcos (94 Dems)
$4,987 to each Democrat who remained opposed to immunity for Telcos (116 Dems)

88 percent of the Dems who changed to supporting immunity (83 Dems of the 94) received PAC contributions from Verizon, AT&T, or Sprint during the last three years (Jan. 2005-Mar. 2008). See below for list of these 94 Dems.

All House Members (June 20th vote:)
Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint gave PAC contributions averaging:

$9,659 to each member of the House voting "YES" (105-Dem, 188-Rep)
$4,810 to each member of the House voting "NO" (128-Dem, 1-Rep)

MAPLight.org's research department findings are based on the combination of contribution data from the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP) with voting data from THOMAS via GovTrack.us.

"Campaign contributions bias our legislative system,” said Daniel Newman, Executive Director of MAPLight.org. “Simply put, candidates who take positions contrary to industry interests are unlikely to receive industry funds and thus have fewer resources for their election campaigns than those whose votes favor industry interests."

Democrats who changed their voting to support immunity for Telcos:

PAC contributions from Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint (January 2005 - March 2008).

Contribution

House Member

District

1

29500

Clyburn, James

SC-6

2

29000

Hoyer, Steny

MD-5

3

28000

Emanuel, Rahm

IL-5

4

27500

Boucher, Frederick

VA-9

5

26000

Meeks, Gregory

NY-6

6

24500

Crowley, Joseph

NY-7

7

24500

Pelosi, Nancy

CA-8

8

24000

Bean, Melissa

IL-8

9

22500

Edwards, Thomas

TX-17

10

22100

Baca, Joe

CA-43

11

21500

Engel, Eliot

NY-17

12

19000

Bishop, Sanford

GA-2

13

18500

Moore, Dennis

KS-3

14

18500

Spratt, John

SC-5

15

18500

Thompson, Bennie

MS-2

16

16000

Melancon, Charles

LA-3

17

15500

Cuellar, Henry

TX-28

18

15500

Stupak, Bart

MI-1

19

15000

Ackerman, Gary

NY-5

20

14800

Butterfield, George

NC-1

21

14300

Tanner, John

TN-8

22

14000

Kind, Ronald

WI-3

23

13500

Barrow, John

GA-12

24

13500

Gordon, Barton

TN-6

25

12500

Costa, Jim

CA-20

26

12500

Ross, Mike

AR-4

27

12000

Green, Al

TX-9

28

12000

Hinojosa, Rubén

TX-15

29

11000

Cardoza, Dennis

CA-18

30

11000

Schiff, Adam

CA-29

31

10000

Boswell, Leonard

IA-3

32

9000

Boyd, F.

FL-2

33

9000

Tauscher, Ellen

CA-10

34

8500

Skelton, Ike

MO-4

35

8000

Ellsworth, Brad

IN-8

36

7500

Gutierrez, Luis

IL-4

37

7500

Rahall, Nick

WV-3

38

7000

Harman, Jane

CA-36

39

7000

Langevin, James

RI-2

40

7000

Lipinski, Daniel

IL-3

41

7000

Reyes, Silvestre

TX-16

42

6500

Matheson, Jim

UT-2

43

6500

Scott, David

GA-13

44

6500

Wilson, Charles

OH-6

45

6000

Cleaver, Emanuel

MO-5

46

6000

Etheridge, Bob

NC-2

47

6000

Herseth Sandlin, Stephanie

SD-0

48

6000

Salazar, John

CO-3

49

5500

Hastings, Alcee

FL-23

50

5500

McCarthy, Carolyn

NY-4

51

5500

McIntyre, Mike

NC-7

52

5000

Davis, Artur

AL-7

53

5000

Murtha, John

PA-12

54

5000

Ortiz, Solomon

TX-27

55

4500

Brown, Corrine

FL-3

56

4500

Donnelly, Joe

IN-2

57

4000

Berman, Howard

CA-28

58

4000

Bishop, Timothy

NY-1

59

4000

Dicks, Norman

WA-6

60

4000

Lowey, Nita

NY-18

61

4000

Mahoney, Tim

FL-16

62

3000

Murphy, Patrick

PA-8

63

3000

Smith, Adam

WA-9

64

2500

Arcuri, Michael

NY-24

65

2000

Altmire, Jason

PA-4

66

2000

Castor, Kathy

FL-11

67

2000

Chandler, Ben

KY-6

68

2000

Giffords, Gabrielle

AZ-8

69

2000

Higgins, Brian

NY-27

70

2000

McNerney, Jerry

CA-11

71

2000

Mitchell, Harry

AZ-5

72

2000

Pomeroy, Earl

ND-0

73

2000

Sherman, Brad

CA-27

74

2000

Sires, Albio

NJ-13

75

1000

Berkley, Shelley

NV-1

76

1000

Boyda, Nancy

KS-2

77

1000

Gillibrand, Kirsten

NY-20

78

1000

Kanjorski, Paul

PA-11

79

1000

Kildee, Dale

MI-5

80

1000

Klein, Ron

FL-22

81

1000

Perlmutter, Ed

CO-7

82

1000

Rodriguez, Ciro

TX-23

83

1000

Space, Zackary

OH-18

84

0

Baird, Brian

WA-3

85

0

Berry, Robert

AR-1

86

0

Marshall, James

GA-8

87

0

Peterson, Collin

MN-7

88

0

Richardson, Laura

CA-37

89

0

Ruppersberger, C.A.

MD-2

90

0

Sestak, Joe

PA-7

91

0

Snyder, Victor

AR-2

92

0

Taylor, Gene

MS-4

93

0

Udall, Mark

CO-2

94

0

Yarmuth, John

KY-3

The FISA bill also requires the administration to submit surveillance procedures to the secret FISA court for approval before surveillance could begin, except in emergency circumstances. The bill's provisions expire at the end of 2012.

The March 16th vote was on the House amendment (to the Senate amendment to H.R. 3773), to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA).

Who We Are:
MAPLight.org is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that provides unprecedented government transparency, shining a light on our broken system of money-dominated politics. We track all campaign contributions given to members of Congress, and how every member of Congress votes on every bill, revealing connections between money and politics never before possible to see. Our concise graphs show correlations between money and votes, and timelines of contributions and votes, showing specifics about when legislators received large donations before and after a vote.

About MAPLight.org:
MAPLight.org is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, nonpartisan organization based in Berkeley, California. Its search engine at MAPLight.org illuminates the connection between Money And Politics (MAP) via an unprecedented database of campaign contributions and legislative outcomes. Data sources include: GovTrack.us; Center for Responsive Politics (OpenSecrets.org); Federal Election Commission (FEC); and National Institute on Money in State Politics (NIMSP). Support and opposition data is obtained through testimony at public hearings, proprietary news databases and public statements on the websites of trade associations and other groups. To learn more visit MAPLight.org.