(no subject)

[Guest guest]

Maybe this is easier so you can follow the messages and comments. According to the Conyers press releases, the Legislation was discussed at a Town Meeting in Detroit on June 3 and was suppose to be submitted that week. Why is it only now being checked to see if it conforms to standards, proper format and the Law? I thought this bill took a year for Conyers and staff to write?

See following emails questions and responses -

My guess is that the Bill will be sent to the House Heath and Sciences Committee. It will not go to Judiciary because it deals with heath issues. Because he put funding in it the House Finance Committee will also have to see it is my guess.

The H number is, in my guess, a number Conyers or staff gave it. The House Clerks office is where it gets a Bill number. The bill number is used for tracking and identification. From the Clerk it goes to Committee assignment.

Once in Committee's, it gets hearings. It also can be changed by amendments. At that time the Committee will say yes or no whether they refer it to the Full House with a favorable recommendation.

Then it gets discussed and more amendments can be attached. These amendments can be for anything, not just about mold. This is when "pork" spending is usually added. Then the House votes.

If passed, it gets referred to the Senate where the process starts over. If the Senate passes the exact same bill that was sent to them, without a word being changed (which is a 1 in a billion chance), the legislation goes to the President.

Very seldom does the other legislative body not make changes to legislation. In that situation, the bill goes to House/Sentate conference to be worked out. If it is than both houses have to vote again.

Sounds like a long process and it usually is. My guess, if it is passed, look for it in 2003 or later. Summer session and elections are coming. My thoughts would be, once we are finally able to review what Congressman Conyers has had written and submitted, is to send letters of support, if we support what he has written, to the Members of the House Committee that it is assigned to.

Ken

Subj: Re: Public Record Analysis and review

Date: 6/18/2002 12:07:28 AM Eastern Daylight Time

From: MBallardAl

KENHMOULTON

Conyers is a ranking member of judiciary. His staff was double checking to make sure all that was in the bill was within federal jurisdiction.

The Bill will be sent to congress next week.

The only number I have is HR 4855. It will change ...

Subj: Re: Public Record Analysis and review

Date: 6/17/2002 5:47:56 PM Eastern Daylight Time

From: KENHMOULTON

MBallardAl

What committee was it assigned to for hearings? What is the HR number?

Ken

Subj: Re: Public Record Analysis and review

Date: 6/17/2002 5:22:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time

From: MBallardAl

KENHMOULTON

Not true about Conyers' Bill.

There was some last minute due diligence done to ensure that it did not get thrown back into committee. This was simply a double check to ensure it didn't go beyond what the federal government was authorized to do.

All is fine with the Bill.

Well, the powers that be know what happened in our situation. They cannot dismiss the Public Record documents of their own State.

I've been told that Congressman Conyers Mold Legislation, wish list, was rejected by the House. I was told they rejected it because it was not in the proper format and language the Congress writes Legislation. Is that true?

If so, he still has mine that is written in the proper format that Congress uses. Any ideas?

Ken

-----------------

A media representative sent me the documents from the June 3 Conyers presentation. I made some of the following comments.

______________________________________________________________________

I received your package on the Conyers mold bill. As I'm sure you are aware, this is not Legislation but rather a wish list or proposal. After reviewing the wish list, I find problems especially in regards to the EPA.

As the EPA told us, and Members of Congress must be aware, the EPA has no legal mandate or jurisdiction in regards to residential structures and air quality. In spite of President Bush telling them to investigate our case, and a letter from Senator Kennedy requesting the same, the EPA told us of their not being able to do anything under the law to investigate.

As far as State licensing of inspectors, members of the Senate and House know from evidence that I have provided that it is these state licensing agencies that refuse to act on any mold or substandard construction issues. The evidence was obtained from Massachusetts government public records. It is also in other States public records as well.

As far as standards for the lumber industry. Dr. Strauss of Texas Tech has been doing research, I understand, in these area for some time. Why reinvent the wheel?

In regards to NIH, they are currently doing an 18 month "study" about mold. The Chairperson, from Harvard, has publicly stated in trails over a 10 year period that mold is "no big deal". I'm told a Judge in Canada laughed at her. With that record from testifying as an expert witness against peoples claims for mold, can we really expect an "honest and open" finding? Her track record is public record and is in court files even in Canada.

As far as the construction guidelines, I first proposed them to Congress in 1998. Many others have done the same as well. Congress has failed to do anything on this issue but praise the building industry.

As far as disclosure, in Massachusetts the Legislature ruled that Realtors do not have to disclose the prior history of a home. If the Feds try, Realtors will stop them and cite State Laws. I can see Supreme Court written on just this issue.

As far as computerized database, I know about these because I have worked in Computers, in government and business, for over 3 decades. Big time money and development as well as costly maintenance and data integrity and security. Look at the current computer problems with the FBI in tracking terrorists.

I think that the wish list helps on the insurance issue but does little for those of us where the mold was a byproduct of illegal construction or corrupt government inspectors at the local, state or federal level. This is one of the bigger causes of mold nationwide.

Finally, the damages mentioned are an insult. In our case, we could get 30 thousand dollars while we have lost 500 thousand dollars. Why must we eat 470 thousand dollars due to government corruption?

In regards to HUD doing inspection of public housing, I know of at least one family, that are friends, that have been injured from HUD. HUD knew of the mold in their home for over a year and did nothing. When they did move them they were put in another public housing with so much mold that mushrooms were growing. Georgia, the Wife, has TB.

What is needed is a straight forward law that sets standards, mandates disclosure and allows for accountability and liability for any group, individuals, companies or government agency or employee whose actions result in mold.

As I have stated for years, what good is it if we find the cause and cure of cancer and develop a pill to cure it but still do nothing to prevent the cause? Mold, like cancer, hurts people.

This is not meant to criticize Congressman Conyers for we should thank him for doing something to try and help. I learned in Washington 30 years ago that with Legislation you ask for the impossible and get what you want through negotiation and bargaining. Let us always set our standards as high as possible for it is our families that we are fighting for.

Ken