Letter from Arlen Specter to me - confirms no Senate Hearings planned - New England Patriots Forums

marcus · 02-26-2008, 10:58 AM

Dear xxxxxx:

Thank you for contacting my office regarding the recent destruction of the evidence related to spying by the New England Patriots. I appreciate your interest and opinion.

During a September 9, 2007 football game, the New England Patriots were found to have been videotaping signals of the New York Jets against league rules. As punishment, the NFL fined the Patriots Head Coach Bill Belichick $500,000, as well as the New England Patriots organization $250,000, and took away the organization's first-round selection in the 2008 draft. After distributing the fines, the NFL destroyed the tapes, supposedly so they could not be leaked or used by anyone for a competitive advantage and because the league felt there was no use for them. I am concerned with the initial action of taping these signals against league rules as well as the way in which the NFL conducted its investigation and especially the league's decision to destroy the tapes.

In 1961, Congress enacted the Sports Broadcasting Act, which gave the NFL a special antitrust exemption. This exemption allows the NFL as a whole to negotiate broadcasting rights with television networks to show their games. This allows the teams to pool their games and receive enormous sums of money which has helped build the league into what it is today. Because Congress has given the NFL a special antitrust exemption, the league in turn has a responsibility to keep the integrity of the game intact. Just as steroid use disturbs the integrity of a baseball game, the illegal taping of another team's signals undermines the integrity of a football game.

While I agree there are more pressing matters facing the United States Senate, I also believe the NFL has a duty to maintain a certain level of integrity, especially taking into account their special antitrust exemption status. While I am not currently seeking a formal hearing, I have met with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and have asked to speak with other officials on this matter.

Again, thank you for your concerns regarding this incident. It is important that I be kept informed of my constituents viewpoints at all times and on all matters. Should you have any further questions or observations, please do not hesitate to contact my office at xxxxxxxxxxxx

Sincerely,

Arlen Specter

BPF · 02-26-2008, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marcus

Dear xxxxxx:

Thank you for contacting my office regarding the recent destruction of the evidence related to spying by the New England Patriots. I appreciate your interest and opinion.

During a September 9, 2007 football game, the New England Patriots were found to have been videotaping signals of the New York Jets against league rules. As punishment, the NFL fined the Patriots Head Coach Bill Belichick $500,000, as well as the New England Patriots organization $250,000, and took away the organization's first-round selection in the 2008 draft. After distributing the fines, the NFL destroyed the tapes, supposedly so they could not be leaked or used by anyone for a competitive advantage and because the league felt there was no use for them. I am concerned with the initial action of taping these signals against league rules as well as the way in which the NFL conducted its investigation and especially the league's decision to destroy the tapes.

In 1961, Congress enacted the Sports Broadcasting Act, which gave the NFL a special antitrust exemption. This exemption allows the NFL as a whole to negotiate broadcasting rights with television networks to show their games. This allows the teams to pool their games and receive enormous sums of money which has helped build the league into what it is today. Because Congress has given the NFL a special antitrust exemption, the league in turn has a responsibility to keep the integrity of the game intact. Just as steroid use disturbs the integrity of a baseball game, the illegal taping of another team's signals undermines the integrity of a football game.

While I agree there are more pressing matters facing the United States Senate, I also believe the NFL has a duty to maintain a certain level of integrity, especially taking into account their special antitrust exemption status. While I am not currently seeking a formal hearing, I have met with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and have asked to speak with other officials on this matter.

Again, thank you for your concerns regarding this incident. It is important that I be kept informed of my constituents viewpoints at all times and on all matters. Should you have any further questions or observations, please do not hesitate to contact my office at 202-224-4254.

Sincerely,

Arlen Specter

When I wrote to Specter he said to write to my state Sen. Sen Kennedy's version is just a little generic:

Dear Mr. xxxxx:

I want you to know how much I appreciate the fact that you took the time to write to me about your important issue. All too often, citizens of our country choose to be part of the "silent majority," in spite of the many issues of concern to them.

It is primarily through correspondence such as yours that I am able to obtain the insights and understand the needs and priorities of my constituents and people throughout the country. I intend to do all I can to be an effective Senator in meeting the many challenges we face.

It is my hope that we will be able to make progress on issues of special concern to you and so many other Americans, and I thank you again for your letter.

Sincerely,
Edward M. Kennedy

***BelichickFan*** · 02-26-2008, 11:11 AM

Stupid old man. "destruction of the evidence related to spying" makes it sound like Belichick is spying on nuclear secrets or something.

Lke others, I now want full hearings with as many people as possible under oath.

***MoLewisrocks*** · 02-26-2008, 11:16 AM

I don't think he wants to know my opinion, and the FBI would probably show up on my doorstep if I were to call that number and share it with them.

I'm far more concerned about influence peddling undermining the integrity of my elected officials than anyting that happens on my cable TV during the course an NFL football season.

PAPatsjunkie · 02-26-2008, 11:19 AM

HA HA HA

I got the exact same email today from Specter. He must have had a lot of response and had his office write up the auto response.

Quote:

Originally Posted by marcus

Dear xxxxxx:

Thank you for contacting my office regarding the recent destruction of the evidence related to spying by the New England Patriots. I appreciate your interest and opinion.

During a September 9, 2007 football game, the New England Patriots were found to have been videotaping signals of the New York Jets against league rules. As punishment, the NFL fined the Patriots Head Coach Bill Belichick $500,000, as well as the New England Patriots organization $250,000, and took away the organization's first-round selection in the 2008 draft. After distributing the fines, the NFL destroyed the tapes, supposedly so they could not be leaked or used by anyone for a competitive advantage and because the league felt there was no use for them. I am concerned with the initial action of taping these signals against league rules as well as the way in which the NFL conducted its investigation and especially the league's decision to destroy the tapes.

In 1961, Congress enacted the Sports Broadcasting Act, which gave the NFL a special antitrust exemption. This exemption allows the NFL as a whole to negotiate broadcasting rights with television networks to show their games. This allows the teams to pool their games and receive enormous sums of money which has helped build the league into what it is today. Because Congress has given the NFL a special antitrust exemption, the league in turn has a responsibility to keep the integrity of the game intact. Just as steroid use disturbs the integrity of a baseball game, the illegal taping of another team's signals undermines the integrity of a football game.

While I agree there are more pressing matters facing the United States Senate, I also believe the NFL has a duty to maintain a certain level of integrity, especially taking into account their special antitrust exemption status. While I am not currently seeking a formal hearing, I have met with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and have asked to speak with other officials on this matter.

Again, thank you for your concerns regarding this incident. It is important that I be kept informed of my constituents viewpoints at all times and on all matters. Should you have any further questions or observations, please do not hesitate to contact my office at 202-224-4254.

Sincerely,

Arlen Specter

***BelichickFan*** · 02-26-2008, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MoLewisrocks

I don't think he wants to know my opinion, and the FBI would probably show up on my doorstep if I were to call that number and share it with them.

You'd also get a warning from one of the moderators here - like I did

p8ryts · 02-26-2008, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marcus

Dear xxxxxx:

Thank you for contacting my office regarding the recent destruction of the evidence related to spying by the New England Patriots. I appreciate your interest and opinion.

During a September 9, 2007 football game, the New England Patriots were found to have been videotaping signals of the New York Jets against league rules. As punishment, the NFL fined the Patriots Head Coach Bill Belichick $500,000, as well as the New England Patriots organization $250,000, and took away the organization's first-round selection in the 2008 draft. After distributing the fines, the NFL destroyed the tapes, supposedly so they could not be leaked or used by anyone for a competitive advantage and because the league felt there was no use for them. I am concerned with the initial action of taping these signals against league rules as well as the way in which the NFL conducted its investigation and especially the league's decision to destroy the tapes.

In 1961, Congress enacted the Sports Broadcasting Act, which gave the NFL a special antitrust exemption. This exemption allows the NFL as a whole to negotiate broadcasting rights with television networks to show their games. This allows the teams to pool their games and receive enormous sums of money which has helped build the league into what it is today. Because Congress has given the NFL a special antitrust exemption, the league in turn has a responsibility to keep the integrity of the game intact. Just as steroid use disturbs the integrity of a baseball game, the illegal taping of another team's signals undermines the integrity of a football game.

While I agree there are more pressing matters facing the United States Senate, I also believe the NFL has a duty to maintain a certain level of integrity, especially taking into account their special antitrust exemption status. While I am not currently seeking a formal hearing, I have met with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and have asked to speak with other officials on this matter.

Again, thank you for your concerns regarding this incident. It is important that I be kept informed of my constituents viewpoints at all times and on all matters. Should you have any further questions or observations, please do not hesitate to contact my office at 202-224-4254.

Sincerely,

Arlen Specter

How come Arlen didn't write me a letter? I sent him a lengthy email.

PatsFanSince74 · 02-26-2008, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MoLewisrocks

I don't think he wants to know my opinion, and the FBI would probably show up on my doorstep if I were to call that number and share it with them.

I'm far more concerned about influence peddling undermining the integrity of my elected officials than anyting that happens on my cable TV during the course an NFL football season.

the 224 number is his published DC senate office number, which you could also find on the web, so just calling that number won't get anyone bothered by "the FBI," unless they make what someone construes as a "threat."

PatsFanSince74 · 02-26-2008, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BPF

When I wrote to Specter he said to write to my state Sen. Sen Kennedy's version is just a little generic:

Dear Mr. xxxxx:

I want you to know how much I appreciate the fact that you took the time to write to me about your important issue. All too often, citizens of our country choose to be part of the "silent majority," in spite of the many issues of concern to them.

It is primarily through correspondence such as yours that I am able to obtain the insights and understand the needs and priorities of my constituents and people throughout the country. I intend to do all I can to be an effective Senator in meeting the many challenges we face.

It is my hope that we will be able to make progress on issues of special concern to you and so many other Americans, and I thank you again for your letter.

Sincerely,
Edward M. Kennedy

"just a little generic" is kind. the response means that either your oriiginal letter wasn't clear (did you ask Kennedy to do something or did you just express an opinion?) or was interpreted as a rant and got tossed in the "polite, general response" pile by the staffer who screened it or it means that Kennedy has told his staff that he doesn't want to touch the issue with a ten foot pole. in any event, it's disappointing.

you're most likely to get a meaningful response by writing a very brief (less than one page with a lot of white space on the page), very clear (one or two points that can be grasped by someone who gives the letter a 10 second initial read, which is about the time you have to get the attention of the staff member), very polite (properly addressed, to "The Honorable Edward M. Kennedy, RSOB, Washington, DC, Dear Senator Kennedy" with suitable deference to his iconic status in the first sentence) letter that makes the case that it is in the senator's interest to take a particular action, whatever that is. In this case, the letter should reference the Senator's seat on the Judiciary Committee, show an understanding of the anti-trust issues raised by Senator Specter and make the case that the exemption is being used inappropriately by the ranking Repbulican member to further another agenda. However, you should also probably research where Kennedy stands on the whole Comcast issue and see what his relationship is with the Krafts (check on his campaign donations). If Kennedy is siding with Comcast and if he isn't friendly with the Krafts, then you have a problem.

***Rob0729*** · 02-26-2008, 12:29 PM

I love how the Specter letter has potential double speak. He says he isn't "currently" seeking formal hearings. Does this mean he is planning to seek them in the future? It sure sounds like he's making the case that it is under his right as a Senator.

I have yet to see anyone other than ardent Patriots haters support his involvement in the matter. I have heard many people and media outlet in PA adamently opposed to Specter's involvement in all of this. I don't see the upside for him other than appeasing his biggest campaign contributor. The people have spoken pretty clearly and overwhelmingly it appears that people don't feel the need he needs to champion the common man against Spygate.

I see this letter as a damage control spin for him to keep his detractors at bay until he can dig up more dirt to try to win over public sentiment and the sentiment of his fellow senators.

Personally, I don't think Leahy will touch this. I am sure he authorized money to investigate the matter to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest, but I don't think he will even entertain the possibility of hearings unless a major smoking gun is found. He may have even told Kraft, Goodell, and/or others in the league he would not be moved to have hearings if the NFL stonewalled Specter like Specter alleges the league of doing.