Democrats Abroad New Zealand
4.30.2005
Kerry Supporters Arrested at Bush Rally Sue Law Enforcement (CommonDreams.org)
Published on Friday, April 29, 2005
IOWA CITY (AP) -- Two women who were arrested at campaign rally for President Bush last fall and strip-searched at a county jail say law enforcement officers conspired to violate their constitutional rights.
Alice McCabe and Christine Nelson are suing the U.S. Secret Service and three of its agents, the Iowa State Patrol and two patrolmen, and Linn County.
The two women, both school teachers in their 50s, were among scores of people who were arrested, removed or barred from Bush rallies last year for wearing shirt or buttons favoring his Democratic rival, Sen. John Kerry, or for vocally criticizing the president.
"I believe the federal government behaved very badly in this situation," said David O'Brien, the women's attorney.
Bob Teig, spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office in Cedar Rapids, said the office had not yet seen the complaint and could not comment.
McCabe and Nelson are described in the lawsuit as political novices, motivated by their opposition to Bush administration policies in Iraq.
(More ... Kerry Supporters Arrested at Bush Rally Sue Law Enforcement) ¶ 13:54 0 comments
IOWA CITY (AP) -- Two women who were arrested at campaign rally for President Bush last fall and strip-searched at a county jail say law enforcement officers conspired to violate their constitutional rights.
Alice McCabe and Christine Nelson are suing the U.S. Secret Service and three of its agents, the Iowa State Patrol and two patrolmen, and Linn County.
The two women, both school teachers in their 50s, were among scores of people who were arrested, removed or barred from Bush rallies last year for wearing shirt or buttons favoring his Democratic rival, Sen. John Kerry, or for vocally criticizing the president.
"I believe the federal government behaved very badly in this situation," said David O'Brien, the women's attorney.
Bob Teig, spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office in Cedar Rapids, said the office had not yet seen the complaint and could not comment.
McCabe and Nelson are described in the lawsuit as political novices, motivated by their opposition to Bush administration policies in Iraq.
(More ... Kerry Supporters Arrested at Bush Rally Sue Law Enforcement) ¶ 13:54 0 comments
Alarm Bells for 'Lame-duck' Bush (TheAge.com.au)
By Michael Gawenda
Washington
April 30, 2005
The US President goes on TV after serious domestic policy stumbles.
President Bush is in trouble. "We're in the lame duck period," says independent pollster John Zogby. "Every day that passes the duck gets lamer."
George Bush's prime time televised news conference on Thursday night (Washington time) was only the fourth of his presidency and was evidence of increasing alarm within the Administration over the challenges he faces.
The three previous prime-time press conferences were all about national security; the first was after the September 11, 2001, attacks and the other two were to lay out his case to go to war in Iraq. This one was about social security reform and the need to pass his controversial energy bill, which even he admits will do nothing to contain rising fuel prices.
One hundred days into his second term, Mr Bush's poll numbers are the lowest for any re-elected second-term president at this point in his term for more than 50 years.
(More ... Alarm bells for 'lame-duck' Bush - World - www.theage.com.au) ¶ 11:47 0 comments
Washington
April 30, 2005
The US President goes on TV after serious domestic policy stumbles.
President Bush is in trouble. "We're in the lame duck period," says independent pollster John Zogby. "Every day that passes the duck gets lamer."
George Bush's prime time televised news conference on Thursday night (Washington time) was only the fourth of his presidency and was evidence of increasing alarm within the Administration over the challenges he faces.
The three previous prime-time press conferences were all about national security; the first was after the September 11, 2001, attacks and the other two were to lay out his case to go to war in Iraq. This one was about social security reform and the need to pass his controversial energy bill, which even he admits will do nothing to contain rising fuel prices.
One hundred days into his second term, Mr Bush's poll numbers are the lowest for any re-elected second-term president at this point in his term for more than 50 years.
(More ... Alarm bells for 'lame-duck' Bush - World - www.theage.com.au) ¶ 11:47 0 comments
Doing Right on Ethics (WashingtonPost.com)
EDITORIAL
Friday, April 29, 2005; Page A22
SOMETIMES THE system works -- even if it takes too much time, noise and anguish. That is the happy lesson of the decision by the House Republican leadership to roll back the changes in ethics rules that were bullied through the body earlier this year. This uncharacteristic reversal may be portrayed as a political victory for Democrats. But that shortsighted analysis shouldn't give pause to House Republicans, who, however belatedly and reluctantly, did the right thing. In the end, their party, the institution in which they serve and the people they represent will be better off for it.
The move is important, first, because it clears the way for the House ethics committee to function again. The committee had been paralyzed by the understandable refusal of the panel's Democrats to operate under the new regime. The committee's first order of business, as four of its five Republican members already have agreed, ought to be an examination of the activities of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.): how his trips with lobbyist Jack Abramoff were generated; what Mr. DeLay knew about their shady financing; whether they were legitimate fact-finding efforts or a flimsy excuse for golf junkets; and the connection, if any, between the legislative interests of those financing Mr. DeLay's travels and his official actions.
(More ... Doing Right on Ethics) ¶ 11:45 0 comments
Friday, April 29, 2005; Page A22
SOMETIMES THE system works -- even if it takes too much time, noise and anguish. That is the happy lesson of the decision by the House Republican leadership to roll back the changes in ethics rules that were bullied through the body earlier this year. This uncharacteristic reversal may be portrayed as a political victory for Democrats. But that shortsighted analysis shouldn't give pause to House Republicans, who, however belatedly and reluctantly, did the right thing. In the end, their party, the institution in which they serve and the people they represent will be better off for it.
The move is important, first, because it clears the way for the House ethics committee to function again. The committee had been paralyzed by the understandable refusal of the panel's Democrats to operate under the new regime. The committee's first order of business, as four of its five Republican members already have agreed, ought to be an examination of the activities of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.): how his trips with lobbyist Jack Abramoff were generated; what Mr. DeLay knew about their shady financing; whether they were legitimate fact-finding efforts or a flimsy excuse for golf junkets; and the connection, if any, between the legislative interests of those financing Mr. DeLay's travels and his official actions.
(More ... Doing Right on Ethics) ¶ 11:45 0 comments
4.29.2005
Frist Offers Compromise on Judicial Posts (NYTimes.com)
By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK
Published: April 29, 2005
WASHINGTON, April 28 - Trying to head off a showdown in the Senate over judicial confirmations, Senator Bill Frist, Republican of Tennessee, the majority leader, proposed a compromise that would allow the minority party to block lower-court appointees if Democrats agreed to give up the power to block nominees for appeals courts and the Supreme Court.
Senator Harry Reid, of Nevada, the minority leader, promptly rejected its terms as "a big wet kiss to the far right."
That impasse makes it all but inevitable that after a recess next week the Senate will soon plunge into a battle over confirmation procedures that could derail much of its business in the months ahead. Because the results of that fight could determine the future shape of the Supreme Court, the standoff has aroused the passions of both liberal and social conservative groups that view it as the culmination of decades of battles about abortion, civil rights and the separation of church and state.
In the last two years, the Senate's Democratic minority has used a filibuster, standing against the 60 votes needed to close debate, to block 10 of President Bush's 45 appellate-court nominees. Mr. Bush reintroduced seven of the blocked nominations this session.
(More ... The New York Times > Washington > Frist Offers Compromise on Judicial Posts_ ¶ 21:51 0 comments
Published: April 29, 2005
WASHINGTON, April 28 - Trying to head off a showdown in the Senate over judicial confirmations, Senator Bill Frist, Republican of Tennessee, the majority leader, proposed a compromise that would allow the minority party to block lower-court appointees if Democrats agreed to give up the power to block nominees for appeals courts and the Supreme Court.
Senator Harry Reid, of Nevada, the minority leader, promptly rejected its terms as "a big wet kiss to the far right."
That impasse makes it all but inevitable that after a recess next week the Senate will soon plunge into a battle over confirmation procedures that could derail much of its business in the months ahead. Because the results of that fight could determine the future shape of the Supreme Court, the standoff has aroused the passions of both liberal and social conservative groups that view it as the culmination of decades of battles about abortion, civil rights and the separation of church and state.
In the last two years, the Senate's Democratic minority has used a filibuster, standing against the 60 votes needed to close debate, to block 10 of President Bush's 45 appellate-court nominees. Mr. Bush reintroduced seven of the blocked nominations this session.
(More ... The New York Times > Washington > Frist Offers Compromise on Judicial Posts_ ¶ 21:51 0 comments
President Touts 'Progressive Indexing' Plan (USATODAY.com)
Posted 4/28/2005 10:35 PM
By Susan Page and Oren Dorell, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — President Bush has been touting the glories of adding individual investment accounts to Social Security since his first campaign for president. He says the proposal would allow workers to accumulate wealth and pass it on to their heirs.
With the Social Security debate at a near-standoff in Congress, Bush is trying to get things moving by endorsing a plan to do something more difficult: curb benefits so the system can sustain the retirement of the huge baby-boom generation.
"So far, we've been talking about the dessert, the sweetener, which is personal accounts," says Boston financier Robert Pozen, who devised the proposal that Bush embraced. "Solvency is the spinach that needs to be eaten first."
Under Pozen's plan, called "progressive indexing," workers with annual incomes of $25,000 or less would continue to have their initial retirement benefits based on the increase in average wages over their years in the workforce. High-income workers, those with annual income of $113,000 or higher, would instead have their initial benefits based on the increase in prices during their working years.
For those in between, initial benefits would be based on a changing "blend" of wage and price increases. The effect on their benefits would depend on precisely how the indexes were weighed.
The change sounds semantic, but the impact would be considerable. Wages historically rise faster than prices, which means the retirement benefits for better-paid workers would be significantly lower than under the current system.
(More ... USATODAY.com - President touts 'progressive indexing' plan) ¶ 21:47 0 comments
By Susan Page and Oren Dorell, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — President Bush has been touting the glories of adding individual investment accounts to Social Security since his first campaign for president. He says the proposal would allow workers to accumulate wealth and pass it on to their heirs.
With the Social Security debate at a near-standoff in Congress, Bush is trying to get things moving by endorsing a plan to do something more difficult: curb benefits so the system can sustain the retirement of the huge baby-boom generation.
"So far, we've been talking about the dessert, the sweetener, which is personal accounts," says Boston financier Robert Pozen, who devised the proposal that Bush embraced. "Solvency is the spinach that needs to be eaten first."
Under Pozen's plan, called "progressive indexing," workers with annual incomes of $25,000 or less would continue to have their initial retirement benefits based on the increase in average wages over their years in the workforce. High-income workers, those with annual income of $113,000 or higher, would instead have their initial benefits based on the increase in prices during their working years.
For those in between, initial benefits would be based on a changing "blend" of wage and price increases. The effect on their benefits would depend on precisely how the indexes were weighed.
The change sounds semantic, but the impact would be considerable. Wages historically rise faster than prices, which means the retirement benefits for better-paid workers would be significantly lower than under the current system.
(More ... USATODAY.com - President touts 'progressive indexing' plan) ¶ 21:47 0 comments
U.S. Image in Australia Isn't So Good, Poll Finds (NYTimes.com)
By RAYMOND BONNER
Published: March 29, 2005
SYDNEY, March 28 - As the point person in the Bush administration's campaign to improve America's image in the world, Karen Hughes may face a more difficult challenge than she imagined and discover that she will have to travel far beyond the Middle East. A poll released Monday in Australia, long known for friendly relations with Americans, found that only 58 percent of the population had a positive view of the United States.
That put the United States behind China (69 percent positive), and not even in the overall Top 10 countries, regions or groups that Australians respect. They have a more positive opinion of France (66 percent) and the United Nations (65 percent), according to the poll, which was commissioned by the Lowy Institute for International Policy, a research institute with a generally center-right orientation.
The survey indicated that Australians think their leaders have been too willing to sign on with America's foreign policy ventures and should listen to the United Nations more, and are evenly divided over whether the greatest threat to the world today comes from American foreign policy or Islamic fundamentalism.
(More ... The New York Times > International > Asia Pacific > U.S. Image in Australia Isn't So Good, Poll Finds) ¶ 21:42 0 comments
Published: March 29, 2005
SYDNEY, March 28 - As the point person in the Bush administration's campaign to improve America's image in the world, Karen Hughes may face a more difficult challenge than she imagined and discover that she will have to travel far beyond the Middle East. A poll released Monday in Australia, long known for friendly relations with Americans, found that only 58 percent of the population had a positive view of the United States.
That put the United States behind China (69 percent positive), and not even in the overall Top 10 countries, regions or groups that Australians respect. They have a more positive opinion of France (66 percent) and the United Nations (65 percent), according to the poll, which was commissioned by the Lowy Institute for International Policy, a research institute with a generally center-right orientation.
The survey indicated that Australians think their leaders have been too willing to sign on with America's foreign policy ventures and should listen to the United Nations more, and are evenly divided over whether the greatest threat to the world today comes from American foreign policy or Islamic fundamentalism.
(More ... The New York Times > International > Asia Pacific > U.S. Image in Australia Isn't So Good, Poll Finds) ¶ 21:42 0 comments
A Private Obsession (NYTimes.com)
OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: April 29, 2005
American health care is unique among advanced countries in its heavy reliance on the private sector. It's also uniquely inefficient. We spend far more per person on health care than any other country, yet many Americans lack health insurance and don't receive essential care.
This week yet another report emphasized just how bad a job the American system does at providing basic health care. A study by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation estimates that 20 million working Americans are uninsured; in Texas, which has the worst record, more than 30 percent of the adults under 65 have no insurance.
And lack of insurance leads to inadequate medical attention. Over a 12-month period, 41 percent of the uninsured were unable to see a doctor when needed because of cost; 56 percent had no personal doctor or health care provider.
Our system is desperately in need of reform. Yet it will be very hard to get useful reform, for two reasons: vested interests and ideology.
(More ... The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: A Private Obsession) ¶ 21:39 0 comments
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: April 29, 2005
American health care is unique among advanced countries in its heavy reliance on the private sector. It's also uniquely inefficient. We spend far more per person on health care than any other country, yet many Americans lack health insurance and don't receive essential care.
This week yet another report emphasized just how bad a job the American system does at providing basic health care. A study by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation estimates that 20 million working Americans are uninsured; in Texas, which has the worst record, more than 30 percent of the adults under 65 have no insurance.
And lack of insurance leads to inadequate medical attention. Over a 12-month period, 41 percent of the uninsured were unable to see a doctor when needed because of cost; 56 percent had no personal doctor or health care provider.
Our system is desperately in need of reform. Yet it will be very hard to get useful reform, for two reasons: vested interests and ideology.
(More ... The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: A Private Obsession) ¶ 21:39 0 comments
4.28.2005
GOP May Be Splintering on Social Security (WashingtonPost.com)
By Jonathan Weisman and Michael A. Fletcher
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, April 27, 2005; Page A04
A badly divided Senate Finance Committee yesterday held the first hearing examining President Bush's efforts to restructure Social Security. While the Democrats remained united in their opposition, there were signs of cracks in the Republicans' support for the president.
After months of political positioning, the stakes were high as the committee took up Bush's signature domestic issue for his second term. The White House has framed the Social Security debate as a matter of political courage, challenging both parties to secure the program's long-term solvency while giving all Americans an ownership stake in their economy. But over the course of the president's Social Security tour, public support for Bush's proposal has fallen, and Democrats see the issue as their best chance to make political gains in Washington.
With that highly charged backdrop, Republican divisions at the hearing had added significance.
One GOP witness repeatedly disparaged the White House's approach to Social Security changes, bolstering Democratic contentions that it would lead to politically untenable benefit cuts. Sen. Craig Thomas (R-Wyo.) questioned the wisdom of adding trillions of dollars in federal debt in the coming decades to finance the president's plan. And Sen. Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) seemed to signal intractable opposition to converting part of the defined Social Security benefit to variable returns from stock and bond investments.
(More ... GOP May Be Splintering on Social Security) ¶ 21:32 0 comments
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, April 27, 2005; Page A04
A badly divided Senate Finance Committee yesterday held the first hearing examining President Bush's efforts to restructure Social Security. While the Democrats remained united in their opposition, there were signs of cracks in the Republicans' support for the president.
After months of political positioning, the stakes were high as the committee took up Bush's signature domestic issue for his second term. The White House has framed the Social Security debate as a matter of political courage, challenging both parties to secure the program's long-term solvency while giving all Americans an ownership stake in their economy. But over the course of the president's Social Security tour, public support for Bush's proposal has fallen, and Democrats see the issue as their best chance to make political gains in Washington.
With that highly charged backdrop, Republican divisions at the hearing had added significance.
One GOP witness repeatedly disparaged the White House's approach to Social Security changes, bolstering Democratic contentions that it would lead to politically untenable benefit cuts. Sen. Craig Thomas (R-Wyo.) questioned the wisdom of adding trillions of dollars in federal debt in the coming decades to finance the president's plan. And Sen. Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) seemed to signal intractable opposition to converting part of the defined Social Security benefit to variable returns from stock and bond investments.
(More ... GOP May Be Splintering on Social Security) ¶ 21:32 0 comments
When the Dollar Bill Comes Due (NYTimes.com)
OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
By CATHERINE L. MANN and KATHARINA PLÜCK
Published: April 27, 2005
Washington
OVER the last two years, the value of the dollar against the major currencies has dropped by more than 25 percent. With the dollar having depreciated so much, why haven't we seen a narrowing of the trade deficit, which in February (the latest month for which numbers are available) reached a new record of $61 billion? A dollar depreciation should bring about what economists call "expenditure switching": as the cost of imports rises, Americans should start buying more goods made at home; in turn, our exports become less expensive for foreigners, which means foreign demand for our products should rise. This shift in exchange rates and prices should eventually correct the country's trade deficit.
But so far, Americans' appetite for imports has yet to slow. That's because, with the exception of oil, imports have not become that much more expensive. One reason is that about 30 percent of our imports come from countries whose currencies have either moved little (the Thai baht), stayed stable (the Chinese yuan) or fallen (the Mexican peso) against the dollar.
But another reason is the worldwide decline during the 1990's of what economists call "pass-through rates": that is, the extent to which changes in the exchange rate induce changes in a country's import and export prices. A study by the economists Linda Goldberg and José Manuel Campa found that pass-through rates for the United States were significantly less than for other industrial countries. A 10 percent change in the dollar has generally yielded only a 2.5 percent change in American import prices within one quarter, and only a 4 percent price change after several quarters. Another study by the Federal Reserve found that pass-through was nearly zero. Indeed, in the case of the Japanese yen, even a 25 percent rise in the yen to dollar rate has generated little if any increase in the price we pay for Japanese goods.
(More ... The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Contributor: When the Dollar Bill Comes Due) ¶ 08:51 0 comments
By CATHERINE L. MANN and KATHARINA PLÜCK
Published: April 27, 2005
Washington
OVER the last two years, the value of the dollar against the major currencies has dropped by more than 25 percent. With the dollar having depreciated so much, why haven't we seen a narrowing of the trade deficit, which in February (the latest month for which numbers are available) reached a new record of $61 billion? A dollar depreciation should bring about what economists call "expenditure switching": as the cost of imports rises, Americans should start buying more goods made at home; in turn, our exports become less expensive for foreigners, which means foreign demand for our products should rise. This shift in exchange rates and prices should eventually correct the country's trade deficit.
But so far, Americans' appetite for imports has yet to slow. That's because, with the exception of oil, imports have not become that much more expensive. One reason is that about 30 percent of our imports come from countries whose currencies have either moved little (the Thai baht), stayed stable (the Chinese yuan) or fallen (the Mexican peso) against the dollar.
But another reason is the worldwide decline during the 1990's of what economists call "pass-through rates": that is, the extent to which changes in the exchange rate induce changes in a country's import and export prices. A study by the economists Linda Goldberg and José Manuel Campa found that pass-through rates for the United States were significantly less than for other industrial countries. A 10 percent change in the dollar has generally yielded only a 2.5 percent change in American import prices within one quarter, and only a 4 percent price change after several quarters. Another study by the Federal Reserve found that pass-through was nearly zero. Indeed, in the case of the Japanese yen, even a 25 percent rise in the yen to dollar rate has generated little if any increase in the price we pay for Japanese goods.
(More ... The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Contributor: When the Dollar Bill Comes Due) ¶ 08:51 0 comments
Bush Urges More Nuclear Plants and Building Refineries on Bases (NYTimes.com)
By MARIA NEWMAN
Published: April 27, 2005
President Bush said today that he wanted the United States to build more nuclear power plants, turn unused military bases into refineries and raise sales of more efficient cars to make America less dependent on foreign fuel sources.
The president, in an address to a conference of the Small Business Administration in Washington, said that he knew that people were concerned about the rising prices of oil. It was the second time this week that he addressed the topic, a tacit acknowledgement that the issue is beginning to weigh on the United States economy and on Mr. Bush's public approval ratings.
The president told his audience at the Washington Hilton that at a recent lunch with soldiers at Fort Hood, near his ranch in Crawford, Tex., one of the troops asked him why he simply did not lower gas prices.
"Obviously, gasoline prices were on his mind," Mr. Bush said. "I said, I wish I could. If I could, I would. I explained to him that the higher cost of gasoline is a problem that has been years in the making."
"Over the past decade, our energy consumption has increased by more than 12 percent, while our domestic production has increased by less than one-half of 1 percent," he added. "It's now time to fix it."
The president listed several strategies to respond to soaring gasoline prices, but all would take years to realize.
(More ... The New York Times > Washington > Bush Urges More Nuclear Plants and Building Refineries on Bases) ¶ 08:45 0 comments
Published: April 27, 2005
President Bush said today that he wanted the United States to build more nuclear power plants, turn unused military bases into refineries and raise sales of more efficient cars to make America less dependent on foreign fuel sources.
The president, in an address to a conference of the Small Business Administration in Washington, said that he knew that people were concerned about the rising prices of oil. It was the second time this week that he addressed the topic, a tacit acknowledgement that the issue is beginning to weigh on the United States economy and on Mr. Bush's public approval ratings.
The president told his audience at the Washington Hilton that at a recent lunch with soldiers at Fort Hood, near his ranch in Crawford, Tex., one of the troops asked him why he simply did not lower gas prices.
"Obviously, gasoline prices were on his mind," Mr. Bush said. "I said, I wish I could. If I could, I would. I explained to him that the higher cost of gasoline is a problem that has been years in the making."
"Over the past decade, our energy consumption has increased by more than 12 percent, while our domestic production has increased by less than one-half of 1 percent," he added. "It's now time to fix it."
The president listed several strategies to respond to soaring gasoline prices, but all would take years to realize.
(More ... The New York Times > Washington > Bush Urges More Nuclear Plants and Building Refineries on Bases) ¶ 08:45 0 comments
False Alarm Sends Bush to Underground Shelter (CNN.com)
Wednesday, April 27, 2005 Posted: 12:51 PM EDT (1651 GMT)
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Fears that an unidentified aircraft had entered restricted space near the White House prompted security officials to move President Bush from the Oval Office to an underground shelter Wednesday.
The brief scare lasted only a few minutes before officials determined it was a false alarm, White House counselor Dan Bartlett said. Some White House staff members were moved out of the West Wing and tourists were rushed from the East Wing.
"There was an indication that an aircraft has entered the no-fly zone," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said. "There's an investigation to determine what it really was."
Security officers toting shotguns took up positions around the White House compound during the incident.
(More ... CNN.com - False alarm sends Bush to underground shelter - Apr 27, 2005) ¶ 08:44 0 comments
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Fears that an unidentified aircraft had entered restricted space near the White House prompted security officials to move President Bush from the Oval Office to an underground shelter Wednesday.
The brief scare lasted only a few minutes before officials determined it was a false alarm, White House counselor Dan Bartlett said. Some White House staff members were moved out of the West Wing and tourists were rushed from the East Wing.
"There was an indication that an aircraft has entered the no-fly zone," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said. "There's an investigation to determine what it really was."
Security officers toting shotguns took up positions around the White House compound during the incident.
(More ... CNN.com - False alarm sends Bush to underground shelter - Apr 27, 2005) ¶ 08:44 0 comments
US 'Conceals High Terror Figures' (news.BBC.co.uk)
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
Data withheld from an annual report on terrorism by the US state department show a sharp increase in attacks in 2004, a top Democratic lawmaker says.
Henry Waxman, citing official briefings given to congressional aides, said the number of "significant" attacks had risen more than three-fold in a year.
The California congressman urged the administration to release the figures.
The state department has said it will stop providing them. It admitted to mistakes in last year's report.
In June 2004 the department was forced to double its original estimate of terror victims in the previous year.
It said 625 people had been killed in attacks worldwide in 2003 - not 307 as stated in the annual Patterns of Global Terrorism report published two months earlier.
(More .. BBC NEWS | Americas | US 'conceals high terror figures') ¶ 08:41 0 comments
Data withheld from an annual report on terrorism by the US state department show a sharp increase in attacks in 2004, a top Democratic lawmaker says.
Henry Waxman, citing official briefings given to congressional aides, said the number of "significant" attacks had risen more than three-fold in a year.
The California congressman urged the administration to release the figures.
The state department has said it will stop providing them. It admitted to mistakes in last year's report.
In June 2004 the department was forced to double its original estimate of terror victims in the previous year.
It said 625 people had been killed in attacks worldwide in 2003 - not 307 as stated in the annual Patterns of Global Terrorism report published two months earlier.
(More .. BBC NEWS | Americas | US 'conceals high terror figures') ¶ 08:41 0 comments
Hastert Urges GOP to Scrap Ethics Changes (SFGate.com)
By LARRY MARGASAK, Associated Press Writer
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
WASHINGTON, (AP) -- House Speaker Dennis Hastert urged fellow Republicans on Wednesday to abandon new rules that led to an ethics committee shutdown and his members appeared ready to follow him in retreat.
"I'm willing to step back," Hastert said after a closed-door meeting with members of the GOP rank and file. Republicans prepared for a vote as early as Wednesday evening.
The Republican lawmakers have endured weeks of intense Democratic criticism and hometown editorials complaining about GOP rule changes that critics have seen as an attempt to protect Majority Leader Tom DeLay from further investigation.
DeLay was admonished by the committee on three separate matters last year and new questions have been raised about whether a lobbyist paid for some of his foreign travel in violation of the rules.
The ethics rules in effect before the January changes allowed investigations to begin if the committee was evenly divided. The Republican changes provided for an automatic dismissal in case of a tie.
(More ... Hastert Urges GOP to Scrap Ethics Changes) ¶ 08:27 0 comments
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
WASHINGTON, (AP) -- House Speaker Dennis Hastert urged fellow Republicans on Wednesday to abandon new rules that led to an ethics committee shutdown and his members appeared ready to follow him in retreat.
"I'm willing to step back," Hastert said after a closed-door meeting with members of the GOP rank and file. Republicans prepared for a vote as early as Wednesday evening.
The Republican lawmakers have endured weeks of intense Democratic criticism and hometown editorials complaining about GOP rule changes that critics have seen as an attempt to protect Majority Leader Tom DeLay from further investigation.
DeLay was admonished by the committee on three separate matters last year and new questions have been raised about whether a lobbyist paid for some of his foreign travel in violation of the rules.
The ethics rules in effect before the January changes allowed investigations to begin if the committee was evenly divided. The Republican changes provided for an automatic dismissal in case of a tie.
(More ... Hastert Urges GOP to Scrap Ethics Changes) ¶ 08:27 0 comments
4.27.2005
The Oblivious Right (NYTimes.com)
By PAUL KRUGMAN
According to John Snow, the Treasury secretary, the global economy is in a "sweet spot." Conservative pundits close to the administration talk, without irony, about a "Bush boom."
Yet two-thirds of Americans polled by Gallup say that the economy is "only fair" or "poor." And only 33 percent of those polled believe the economy is improving, while 59 percent think it's getting worse.
Is the administration's obliviousness to the public's economic anxiety just partisanship? I don't think so: President Bush and other Republican leaders honestly think that we're living in the best of times. After all, everyone they talk to says so.
Since November's election, the victors have managed to be on the wrong side of public opinion on one issue after another: the economy, Social Security privatization, Terri Schiavo, Tom DeLay. By large margins, Americans say that the country is headed in the wrong direction, and Mr. Bush is the least popular second-term president on record.
What's going on? Actually, it's quite simple: Mr. Bush and his party talk only to their base - corporate interests and the religious right - and are oblivious to everyone else's concerns.
(More ... The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: The Oblivious Right) ¶ 08:42 0 comments
According to John Snow, the Treasury secretary, the global economy is in a "sweet spot." Conservative pundits close to the administration talk, without irony, about a "Bush boom."
Yet two-thirds of Americans polled by Gallup say that the economy is "only fair" or "poor." And only 33 percent of those polled believe the economy is improving, while 59 percent think it's getting worse.
Is the administration's obliviousness to the public's economic anxiety just partisanship? I don't think so: President Bush and other Republican leaders honestly think that we're living in the best of times. After all, everyone they talk to says so.
Since November's election, the victors have managed to be on the wrong side of public opinion on one issue after another: the economy, Social Security privatization, Terri Schiavo, Tom DeLay. By large margins, Americans say that the country is headed in the wrong direction, and Mr. Bush is the least popular second-term president on record.
What's going on? Actually, it's quite simple: Mr. Bush and his party talk only to their base - corporate interests and the religious right - and are oblivious to everyone else's concerns.
(More ... The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: The Oblivious Right) ¶ 08:42 0 comments
The Disappearing Wall (NYTimes.com)
EDITORIAL
Published: April 26, 2005
To the dismay of many mainstream religious leaders, the Senate majority leader, Bill Frist, participated in a weekend telecast organized by conservative Christian groups to smear Democrats as enemies of "people of faith." Besides listening to Senator Frist's videotaped speech, viewers heard a speaker call the Supreme Court a despotic oligarchy. Meanwhile, the House majority leader, Tom DeLay, has threatened the judiciary for not following the regressive social agenda he shares with the far-right fundamentalists controlling his party.
Apart from confirming an unwholesome disrespect for traditional American values like checks and balances, the assault on judges is part of a wide-ranging and successful Republican campaign to breach the wall between church and state to advance a particular brand of religion. No theoretical exercise, the program is having a corrosive effect on policymaking and the lives of Americans.
(More ... The New York Times > Opinion > The Disappearing Wall) ¶ 08:36 0 comments
Published: April 26, 2005
To the dismay of many mainstream religious leaders, the Senate majority leader, Bill Frist, participated in a weekend telecast organized by conservative Christian groups to smear Democrats as enemies of "people of faith." Besides listening to Senator Frist's videotaped speech, viewers heard a speaker call the Supreme Court a despotic oligarchy. Meanwhile, the House majority leader, Tom DeLay, has threatened the judiciary for not following the regressive social agenda he shares with the far-right fundamentalists controlling his party.
Apart from confirming an unwholesome disrespect for traditional American values like checks and balances, the assault on judges is part of a wide-ranging and successful Republican campaign to breach the wall between church and state to advance a particular brand of religion. No theoretical exercise, the program is having a corrosive effect on policymaking and the lives of Americans.
(More ... The New York Times > Opinion > The Disappearing Wall) ¶ 08:36 0 comments
Bush Urges Saudis to Boost Oil Production (TheAge.com.au)
The US President warns that unless rising oil prices are curbed, the markets will be gravely damaged.
By Michael Gawenda
United States correspondent
Washington
April 27, 2005
President George Bush has asked Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Abdullah to increase Saudi oil production to curb rising oil prices, which Mr Bush said would soon damage markets.
With US petrol prices up almost 25 per cent in six months and polls showing that Americans blame the Bush Administration for these increases, Mr Bush said oil prices were on top of the agenda at his meeting with Prince Abdullah at his Texas ranch.
"The crown prince understands that it is very important to make sure that the price of oil is reasonable," he said. "A high oil price will damage markets - and he knows that."
While the talks were taking place, a Saudi spokesman outlined to the media a plan that would involve spending $US50 billion ($A64 billion) to increase production capacity to 12.5 million barrels a day by 2009 and to 15 million barrels a day in the subsequent decade. Present Saudi oil production is 9.5 million barrels a day.
National Security Adviser Steve Hadley welcomed the announcement, saying that when the Saudis increased production this would have a positive effect on oil prices.
(More ... Bush urges Saudis to boost oil production - World - www.theage.com.au) ¶ 08:24 0 comments
By Michael Gawenda
United States correspondent
Washington
April 27, 2005
President George Bush has asked Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Abdullah to increase Saudi oil production to curb rising oil prices, which Mr Bush said would soon damage markets.
With US petrol prices up almost 25 per cent in six months and polls showing that Americans blame the Bush Administration for these increases, Mr Bush said oil prices were on top of the agenda at his meeting with Prince Abdullah at his Texas ranch.
"The crown prince understands that it is very important to make sure that the price of oil is reasonable," he said. "A high oil price will damage markets - and he knows that."
While the talks were taking place, a Saudi spokesman outlined to the media a plan that would involve spending $US50 billion ($A64 billion) to increase production capacity to 12.5 million barrels a day by 2009 and to 15 million barrels a day in the subsequent decade. Present Saudi oil production is 9.5 million barrels a day.
National Security Adviser Steve Hadley welcomed the announcement, saying that when the Saudis increased production this would have a positive effect on oil prices.
(More ... Bush urges Saudis to boost oil production - World - www.theage.com.au) ¶ 08:24 0 comments
Dean Down Under! Invitation to Aussie MeetUp ...
Dear Democrats Abroad New Zealand,
Democrats Abroad Australia would be DELIGHTED if any of you are able or happened to be in Sydney on Tuesday 3 May to join us for the above captioned tremendously exciting event! Full details are in the attached announcement below.
Please contact me if you have any questions or to alert us that you are coming. We'd be very, very pleased if any of you were to join us.
The Executive Committee of Democrats Abroad Australia is having its very first face-to-face meeting of officers at 5.30pm on the evening of the Dean address. (Given the tremendous distance between our local chapters - officers of DA Australia span 3 capital cities - we have only previously 'met' via teleconference or chat room. The Dean visit has been a catalyst for this face to fact meeting.) We invite you to please consider sitting in on our Exec Com meeting as well.
Look forward to hearing back from you.
Democratically yours,
Carmelan Polce
Chair
Democrats Abroad Australia
==============================
SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT:
Governor Howard Dean, 2004 Democratic Party candidate for President, founder of Democracy for America and newly elected Chair of the Democratic National Committee, will address Democrats Abroad Australia LIVE in Sydney on Tuesday 3 May 2005.
Governor Dean will be in Australia on a personal, family visit in late April/early May and has offered to address the members of Democrats Abroad Australia and share his plan for the Democratic Party. This is a very special opportunity to hear directly from Governor Dean about his vision to rejuvenate the Democratic Party, incorporate grassroots activism in efforts to support Democratic candidates for elected office at every level of government and take on the Republican agenda.
Members are strongly encouraged to mark the Tues 3 May DA Australia Meet Up in Sydney as a must-attend event! If you are unable to attend in person, please watch for further bulletins on our interactive webcast of the event.
Invitiations to this event are directed towards members of DA Australia, their partners and their US citizen guests who form potential new members. Non-US citizen are encouranged to attend the webcast.
Date: Tuesday 3 May 2005
Time: 6.30pm for 7pm start
Place: Upstairs Lounge, Bar Broadway, #2 Broadway,
Corner of Broadway & Regent St, Sydney (1 block from Central Station)
Admission: Donations accepted from US citizens ¶ 08:14 0 comments
Democrats Abroad Australia would be DELIGHTED if any of you are able or happened to be in Sydney on Tuesday 3 May to join us for the above captioned tremendously exciting event! Full details are in the attached announcement below.
Please contact me if you have any questions or to alert us that you are coming. We'd be very, very pleased if any of you were to join us.
The Executive Committee of Democrats Abroad Australia is having its very first face-to-face meeting of officers at 5.30pm on the evening of the Dean address. (Given the tremendous distance between our local chapters - officers of DA Australia span 3 capital cities - we have only previously 'met' via teleconference or chat room. The Dean visit has been a catalyst for this face to fact meeting.) We invite you to please consider sitting in on our Exec Com meeting as well.
Look forward to hearing back from you.
Democratically yours,
Carmelan Polce
Chair
Democrats Abroad Australia
==============================
SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT:
Governor Howard Dean, 2004 Democratic Party candidate for President, founder of Democracy for America and newly elected Chair of the Democratic National Committee, will address Democrats Abroad Australia LIVE in Sydney on Tuesday 3 May 2005.
Governor Dean will be in Australia on a personal, family visit in late April/early May and has offered to address the members of Democrats Abroad Australia and share his plan for the Democratic Party. This is a very special opportunity to hear directly from Governor Dean about his vision to rejuvenate the Democratic Party, incorporate grassroots activism in efforts to support Democratic candidates for elected office at every level of government and take on the Republican agenda.
Members are strongly encouraged to mark the Tues 3 May DA Australia Meet Up in Sydney as a must-attend event! If you are unable to attend in person, please watch for further bulletins on our interactive webcast of the event.
Invitiations to this event are directed towards members of DA Australia, their partners and their US citizen guests who form potential new members. Non-US citizen are encouranged to attend the webcast.
Date: Tuesday 3 May 2005
Time: 6.30pm for 7pm start
Place: Upstairs Lounge, Bar Broadway, #2 Broadway,
Corner of Broadway & Regent St, Sydney (1 block from Central Station)
Admission: Donations accepted from US citizens ¶ 08:14 0 comments
4.25.2005
Democratic Moral Values? (NYTimes.com)
THE WAY WE LIVE NOW
By MATT BAI
Published: April 24, 2005
You can forgive Democrats in Washington for feeling somewhat vindicated by the way the controversy over Terri Schiavo played out. For years, after all, they waited in vain for the moment when Republicans might trip over their own arrogance while crusading for moral values, and finally, if polls are to be believed, it happened. Spurred by opportunism and more than a little genuine religious fervor, the heirs to Goldwater and Reagan seemed to forget how they came to control the values debate in America in the first place: not by interfering in the moral choices of families but by promising to stop government from doing exactly that. In truth, it had been a long time since Republican leaders paid more than superficial tribute to their libertarian creed, but it was only now, in the battle over a dying woman's wishes, that the public seemed to call them on it.
And yet, satisfying as it was for Democrats to watch Bill Frist and George W. Bush grow mute in the face of voter unease, they couldn't escape from the fact that the Schiavo episode exposed something hollow in their party too. Far from having made a compelling case for euthanasia or against morality by fiat, Democrats, with a few notable exceptions, pretty much became bystanders to the whole unseemly affair. And while Republicans managed to further define themselves as a party that would even go to unpopular lengths to defend the sanctity of ravaged and unborn souls alike, Democrats were again left to ponder their own identity in an age in which religious values and scientific insight seem increasingly to be hurtling toward collision. Even in defeat, Republicans emerged as ''the party of life.'' And as one leading Democratic operative privately warned a roomful of allies, ''We can't just be the party of death.''
(More ... The New York Times > Magazine > The Way We Live Now: Democratic Moral Values?) ¶ 11:07 0 comments
By MATT BAI
Published: April 24, 2005
You can forgive Democrats in Washington for feeling somewhat vindicated by the way the controversy over Terri Schiavo played out. For years, after all, they waited in vain for the moment when Republicans might trip over their own arrogance while crusading for moral values, and finally, if polls are to be believed, it happened. Spurred by opportunism and more than a little genuine religious fervor, the heirs to Goldwater and Reagan seemed to forget how they came to control the values debate in America in the first place: not by interfering in the moral choices of families but by promising to stop government from doing exactly that. In truth, it had been a long time since Republican leaders paid more than superficial tribute to their libertarian creed, but it was only now, in the battle over a dying woman's wishes, that the public seemed to call them on it.
And yet, satisfying as it was for Democrats to watch Bill Frist and George W. Bush grow mute in the face of voter unease, they couldn't escape from the fact that the Schiavo episode exposed something hollow in their party too. Far from having made a compelling case for euthanasia or against morality by fiat, Democrats, with a few notable exceptions, pretty much became bystanders to the whole unseemly affair. And while Republicans managed to further define themselves as a party that would even go to unpopular lengths to defend the sanctity of ravaged and unborn souls alike, Democrats were again left to ponder their own identity in an age in which religious values and scientific insight seem increasingly to be hurtling toward collision. Even in defeat, Republicans emerged as ''the party of life.'' And as one leading Democratic operative privately warned a roomful of allies, ''We can't just be the party of death.''
(More ... The New York Times > Magazine > The Way We Live Now: Democratic Moral Values?) ¶ 11:07 0 comments
4.24.2005
Dems: Energy Bill Would Raise Gas Prices (USATODAY.com)
Posted 4/23/2005 12:43 PM Updated 4/23/2005 7:47 PM
WASHINGTON (AP) — The energy bill that passed the House on Thursday will raise gasoline prices and subsidize oil companies but fail to reduce the country's dependence on foreign oil, Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., said Saturday.
Markey, who tried unsuccessfully to force changes in the bill during House debate, said the legislation will make the United States more dependent on foreign oil because it fails to require cars and sport utility vehicles to be more fuel-efficient.
"We cannot afford to continue to pursue such a failed energy policy," Markey said in his party's weekly radio address. "If we fail to reduce our dependence on OPEC oil, we remain beholden to events in dangerous, unstable parts of the world. ... If we fail to reduce the cost of energy, businesses will suffer, farms will fail and families find it more difficult to make ends meet."
The bill, which passed the House by a 249-183 vote, reflects many of President Bush's energy priorities. It would open an Alaska wildlife refuge to oil drilling and provide $12 billion in tax breaks and subsidies to traditional energy industries, including oil, natural gas, nuclear and coal producers.
But opponents said it does little to foster less energy use and will damage the environment.
(More ... USATODAY.com - Dems: Energy bill would raise gas prices) ¶ 19:12 0 comments
WASHINGTON (AP) — The energy bill that passed the House on Thursday will raise gasoline prices and subsidize oil companies but fail to reduce the country's dependence on foreign oil, Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., said Saturday.
Markey, who tried unsuccessfully to force changes in the bill during House debate, said the legislation will make the United States more dependent on foreign oil because it fails to require cars and sport utility vehicles to be more fuel-efficient.
"We cannot afford to continue to pursue such a failed energy policy," Markey said in his party's weekly radio address. "If we fail to reduce our dependence on OPEC oil, we remain beholden to events in dangerous, unstable parts of the world. ... If we fail to reduce the cost of energy, businesses will suffer, farms will fail and families find it more difficult to make ends meet."
The bill, which passed the House by a 249-183 vote, reflects many of President Bush's energy priorities. It would open an Alaska wildlife refuge to oil drilling and provide $12 billion in tax breaks and subsidies to traditional energy industries, including oil, natural gas, nuclear and coal producers.
But opponents said it does little to foster less energy use and will damage the environment.
(More ... USATODAY.com - Dems: Energy bill would raise gas prices) ¶ 19:12 0 comments
Passing the Buck (NYTimes.com)
EDITORIAL
By Paul Krugman
Published: Saturday, April 22, 2005
The United States spends far more on health care than other advanced countries. Yet we don't appear to receive more medical services. And we have lower life-expectancy and higher infant-mortality rates than countries that spend less than half as much per person. How do we do it?
An important part of the answer is that much of our health care spending is devoted to passing the buck: trying to get someone else to pay the bills.
According to the World Health Organization, in the United States administrative expenses eat up about 15 percent of the money paid in premiums to private health insurance companies, but only 4 percent of the budgets of public insurance programs, which consist mainly of Medicare and Medicaid. The numbers for both public and private insurance are similar in other countries - but because we rely much more heavily than anyone else on private insurance, our total administrative costs are much higher.
According to the health organization, the higher costs of private insurers are "mainly due to the extensive bureaucracy required to assess risk, rate premiums, design benefit packages and review, pay or refuse claims." Public insurance plans have far less bureaucracy because they don't try to screen out high-risk clients or charge them higher fees.
And the costs directly incurred by insurers are only half the story. Doctors "must hire office personnel just to deal with the insurance companies," Dr. Atul Gawande, a practicing physician, wrote in The New Yorker. "A well-run office can get the insurer's rejection rate down from 30 percent to, say, 15 percent. That's how a doctor makes money. ... It's a war with insurance, every step of the way."
(More ... The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: Passing the Buck) ¶ 19:00 0 comments
By Paul Krugman
Published: Saturday, April 22, 2005
The United States spends far more on health care than other advanced countries. Yet we don't appear to receive more medical services. And we have lower life-expectancy and higher infant-mortality rates than countries that spend less than half as much per person. How do we do it?
An important part of the answer is that much of our health care spending is devoted to passing the buck: trying to get someone else to pay the bills.
According to the World Health Organization, in the United States administrative expenses eat up about 15 percent of the money paid in premiums to private health insurance companies, but only 4 percent of the budgets of public insurance programs, which consist mainly of Medicare and Medicaid. The numbers for both public and private insurance are similar in other countries - but because we rely much more heavily than anyone else on private insurance, our total administrative costs are much higher.
According to the health organization, the higher costs of private insurers are "mainly due to the extensive bureaucracy required to assess risk, rate premiums, design benefit packages and review, pay or refuse claims." Public insurance plans have far less bureaucracy because they don't try to screen out high-risk clients or charge them higher fees.
And the costs directly incurred by insurers are only half the story. Doctors "must hire office personnel just to deal with the insurance companies," Dr. Atul Gawande, a practicing physician, wrote in The New Yorker. "A well-run office can get the insurer's rejection rate down from 30 percent to, say, 15 percent. That's how a doctor makes money. ... It's a war with insurance, every step of the way."
(More ... The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: Passing the Buck) ¶ 19:00 0 comments
4.23.2005
GOP Volunteer Probed on Role at President's Speech (WashingtonPost.com)
3 Democratic Observers Were Ejected From Event
By Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, April 23, 2005; Page A06
The U.S. Secret Service is investigating whether a Republican volunteer committed the crime of impersonating a federal agent while forcibly removing three people from one of President Bush's public Social Security events, according to people familiar with the probe.
The Secret Service this week sent agents to Denver to probe allegations by three area Democrats that they were ousted from Bush's March 21 event. The three did not stage any protest at the rally and were later told by the Secret Service they were removed because their vehicle displayed an anti-Bush bumper sticker.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the man who removed them was a GOP volunteer, but he refused to divulge his name or whether he works in Colorado or Washington. "If someone is coming to an event to disrupt it, they are going to be asked to leave," McClellan said.
The Secret Service knows the man's name, one of the people familiar with the probe said, and has interviewed him. Secret Service spokesman Jim Mackin refused to comment for this article.
(More ... GOP Volunteer Probed on Role at President's Speech (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 20:58 0 comments
By Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, April 23, 2005; Page A06
The U.S. Secret Service is investigating whether a Republican volunteer committed the crime of impersonating a federal agent while forcibly removing three people from one of President Bush's public Social Security events, according to people familiar with the probe.
The Secret Service this week sent agents to Denver to probe allegations by three area Democrats that they were ousted from Bush's March 21 event. The three did not stage any protest at the rally and were later told by the Secret Service they were removed because their vehicle displayed an anti-Bush bumper sticker.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the man who removed them was a GOP volunteer, but he refused to divulge his name or whether he works in Colorado or Washington. "If someone is coming to an event to disrupt it, they are going to be asked to leave," McClellan said.
The Secret Service knows the man's name, one of the people familiar with the probe said, and has interviewed him. Secret Service spokesman Jim Mackin refused to comment for this article.
(More ... GOP Volunteer Probed on Role at President's Speech (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 20:58 0 comments
Fourth 'R' for Earth Day - Reduce, Reuse, Recycle ... Repair (ChristianScienceMonitor.com)
By Wangari Maathai
Christian Science Monitor
Published Friday, April 22, 2005
In 2004, the Norwegian Nobel committee made a revolutionary decision. In awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to an environmentalist for the first time, the committee broadened the concept of peace. The message the committee sent was this: If we want a peaceful world, we have to manage our environment responsibly and sustainably. We also have to share natural resources equitably at local, national, and global levels.
Since winning that prize, I have traveled to many parts of the world sharing the groundbreaking message of the Nobel committee. Friday, the 35th celebration of Earth Day provides us the opportunity to rededicate ourselves to doing all we can in our daily lives to protect and nurture the Earth. There can be no better time. The recently released Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Report shows that nature provides so many "services" that the decline of ecosystems worldwide has measurable deleterious effects on human well-being. The 1,300 scientists compiling the report found that 60 percent of nature's vital services that make all life possible - including fresh water and the flood protection and climate-stabilizing capacities of forests - are already degraded or in danger.
Nature is not an amenity to be drawn upon. It is a fundamental component of our ability to survive - and a central pillar in expanding the possibilities for peace.
(More ... Fourth 'R' for Earth Day - Reduce, Reuse, Recycle ... Repair) ¶ 17:34 0 comments
Christian Science Monitor
Published Friday, April 22, 2005
In 2004, the Norwegian Nobel committee made a revolutionary decision. In awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to an environmentalist for the first time, the committee broadened the concept of peace. The message the committee sent was this: If we want a peaceful world, we have to manage our environment responsibly and sustainably. We also have to share natural resources equitably at local, national, and global levels.
Since winning that prize, I have traveled to many parts of the world sharing the groundbreaking message of the Nobel committee. Friday, the 35th celebration of Earth Day provides us the opportunity to rededicate ourselves to doing all we can in our daily lives to protect and nurture the Earth. There can be no better time. The recently released Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Report shows that nature provides so many "services" that the decline of ecosystems worldwide has measurable deleterious effects on human well-being. The 1,300 scientists compiling the report found that 60 percent of nature's vital services that make all life possible - including fresh water and the flood protection and climate-stabilizing capacities of forests - are already degraded or in danger.
Nature is not an amenity to be drawn upon. It is a fundamental component of our ability to survive - and a central pillar in expanding the possibilities for peace.
(More ... Fourth 'R' for Earth Day - Reduce, Reuse, Recycle ... Repair) ¶ 17:34 0 comments
4.22.2005
DeLay Criticizes Supreme Court Justice (CNN.com)
Wednesday, April 20, 2005 Posted: 10:42 AM EDT (1442 GMT)
WASHINGTON (AP) -- House Majority Leader Tom DeLay says Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy's work from the bench has been outrageous, his latest salvo at the federal judiciary in the weeks following the courts' refusal to stop Terri Schiavo's death.
DeLay also labeled a lot of the courts' Republican appointees as "judicial activists," a term applied by conservatives to judges they dislike for not following what they call strict interpretations of the Constitution.
The No. 2 Republican in the House has been openly critical of the federal courts since they refused to order the reinsertion of Schiavo's feeding tube. And he pointed to Kennedy as an example of Republican members of the Supreme Court who were activist and isolated.
"Absolutely. We've got Justice Kennedy writing decisions based upon international law, not the Constitution of the United States? That's just outrageous," DeLay told Fox News Radio on Tuesday. "And not only that, but he said in session that he does his own research on the Internet? That is just incredibly outrageous."
A spokeswoman for the court, Kathy Arberg, said Kennedy could not be reached for comment.
Although Kennedy was appointed to the Supreme Court by President Reagan, a conservative icon, he has aroused conservatives' ire by sometimes agreeing with the court's more liberal members. Nevertheless, it is unusual for a congressional leader to single out a Supreme Court justice for criticism.
Dan Allen, a DeLay spokesman, declined comment on the interview.
Democrats jumped on DeLay's comments Wednesday morning.
(More ... CNN.com - DeLay criticizes Supreme Court justice - Apr 20, 2005) ¶ 21:36 0 comments
WASHINGTON (AP) -- House Majority Leader Tom DeLay says Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy's work from the bench has been outrageous, his latest salvo at the federal judiciary in the weeks following the courts' refusal to stop Terri Schiavo's death.
DeLay also labeled a lot of the courts' Republican appointees as "judicial activists," a term applied by conservatives to judges they dislike for not following what they call strict interpretations of the Constitution.
The No. 2 Republican in the House has been openly critical of the federal courts since they refused to order the reinsertion of Schiavo's feeding tube. And he pointed to Kennedy as an example of Republican members of the Supreme Court who were activist and isolated.
"Absolutely. We've got Justice Kennedy writing decisions based upon international law, not the Constitution of the United States? That's just outrageous," DeLay told Fox News Radio on Tuesday. "And not only that, but he said in session that he does his own research on the Internet? That is just incredibly outrageous."
A spokeswoman for the court, Kathy Arberg, said Kennedy could not be reached for comment.
Although Kennedy was appointed to the Supreme Court by President Reagan, a conservative icon, he has aroused conservatives' ire by sometimes agreeing with the court's more liberal members. Nevertheless, it is unusual for a congressional leader to single out a Supreme Court justice for criticism.
Dan Allen, a DeLay spokesman, declined comment on the interview.
Democrats jumped on DeLay's comments Wednesday morning.
(More ... CNN.com - DeLay criticizes Supreme Court justice - Apr 20, 2005) ¶ 21:36 0 comments
Antarctic Glaciers Show Retreat (news.BBC.co.uk)
The glaciers of the Antarctic Peninsula are in rapid retreat.
By Jonathan Amos
BBC News science reporter
A detailed study reported in Science magazine shows nearly 90% of the ice bodies streaming down from the mountains to the ocean are losing mass.
But the authors - a joint team from the British-Antarctic and US-Geological Surveys - say the big melt could have a number of complex causes.
Although higher air temperatures are a factor, they say, the full picture may go beyond just simple global warming.
This study demonstrates the enormous importance of gathering long-term data
Dr Andrew Sugden, Science magazine,
"The overall picture is of glaciers retreating in a pattern that suggests the most important factor is atmospheric warming; we can connect the retreat with the observed warming recorded at climate stations along the peninsula," explained Dr David Vaughan, from the British Antarctic Survey (Bas).
"But it's not a perfect fit; there seem to be other factors involved as well - possibly to do with changing ocean currents and temperatures," he told BBC News.
(More ..BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Antarctic glaciers show retreat) ¶ 13:49 0 comments
By Jonathan Amos
BBC News science reporter
A detailed study reported in Science magazine shows nearly 90% of the ice bodies streaming down from the mountains to the ocean are losing mass.
But the authors - a joint team from the British-Antarctic and US-Geological Surveys - say the big melt could have a number of complex causes.
Although higher air temperatures are a factor, they say, the full picture may go beyond just simple global warming.
This study demonstrates the enormous importance of gathering long-term data
Dr Andrew Sugden, Science magazine,
"The overall picture is of glaciers retreating in a pattern that suggests the most important factor is atmospheric warming; we can connect the retreat with the observed warming recorded at climate stations along the peninsula," explained Dr David Vaughan, from the British Antarctic Survey (Bas).
"But it's not a perfect fit; there seem to be other factors involved as well - possibly to do with changing ocean currents and temperatures," he told BBC News.
(More ..BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Antarctic glaciers show retreat) ¶ 13:49 0 comments
Powell Plays Behind the Scenes Role in Bolton Debate (WashingtonPost.com)
By Jim VandeHei and Robin Wright
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, April 22, 2005; 7:50 PM
Former secretary of state Colin L. Powell is emerging as a behind the scenes player in the battle over John Bolton's nomination to the United Nations, privately telling at least two key Republican lawmakers that Bolton is smart, but a very problematic government official, according to Republican sources.
Powell spoke in recent days with Sens. Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I) and Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), two of three GOP members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee who have raised concerns about Bolton's confirmation, the sources said. Powell did not advise the senators to oppose Bolton, but offered a frank assessment of the nominee as a man who was challenging to work with on personnel and policy matters, according to two people familiar with the conversation.
"General Powell has returned calls from senators who wanted to discuss specific questions that have been raised," said Margaret Cifrino, a Powell spokeswoman. "He has not reached out to senators" and considers the discussions private. A Chafee spokesman confirmed that at least two conversations took place. Bolton served under Powell as his undersecretary of state for arms control, and the two were known to have serious clashes.
(More ... Powell Plays Behind the Scenes Role in Bolton Debate (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 13:21 0 comments
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, April 22, 2005; 7:50 PM
Former secretary of state Colin L. Powell is emerging as a behind the scenes player in the battle over John Bolton's nomination to the United Nations, privately telling at least two key Republican lawmakers that Bolton is smart, but a very problematic government official, according to Republican sources.
Powell spoke in recent days with Sens. Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I) and Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), two of three GOP members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee who have raised concerns about Bolton's confirmation, the sources said. Powell did not advise the senators to oppose Bolton, but offered a frank assessment of the nominee as a man who was challenging to work with on personnel and policy matters, according to two people familiar with the conversation.
"General Powell has returned calls from senators who wanted to discuss specific questions that have been raised," said Margaret Cifrino, a Powell spokeswoman. "He has not reached out to senators" and considers the discussions private. A Chafee spokesman confirmed that at least two conversations took place. Bolton served under Powell as his undersecretary of state for arms control, and the two were known to have serious clashes.
(More ... Powell Plays Behind the Scenes Role in Bolton Debate (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 13:21 0 comments
4.21.2005
Blame China? (NYTimes.com)
EDITORIAL
Published: April 21, 2005
Members of Congress, egged on by American manufacturers, are threatening to slap punitive tariffs on Chinese goods unless China increases the exchange rate of its currency, the yuan, thus raising the price of Chinese imports here. Some Senate Democrats are even threatening to block President Bush's choice for the United States trade representative, Rob Portman, unless the administration also espouses get-tough tactics. This is protectionism raising its ugly head, and an all-around dreadful strategy. That's only in part because Mr. Portman, one of the president's better nominations, deserves confirmation. Worse, it's based on a misunderstanding of both China's financial situation and the cause of American economic woes.
At the heart of this debate is China's policy of linking the value of the yuan to the value of the dollar. That was called sound policy when the dollar was strong. But now that it is weak, Congressional critics call it manipulation because it makes already inexpensive Chinese goods even cheaper the world over. As proof that the yuan is undervalued, the tariff seekers point to the United States' ballooning trade deficit with China, which accounted for about one-fourth of the United States' gargantuan global trade imbalance of $617 billion in 2004.
The trade deficit and the loss of American manufacturing jobs are very serious problems. It would be nice to think that they would self-correct if China would only change its ways. Nice, but wrong. Most of the trade gap with China is caused by Americans' insatiable appetite for Chinese imports, for which there are few domestic substitutes. And even if the yuan's exchange rate is too low - a point on which economists differ - it is a minor contributor to the trade deficit. If China let the yuan appreciate by 20 percent, and most other Asian currencies followed suit, the deficit would probably decline by only about one-fifth over the next year or two. That's not nearly enough to bring the American trade imbalance into a range that is generally considered sustainable.
(More ... The New York Times > Opinion > Editorial: Blame China?) ¶ 23:59 0 comments
Published: April 21, 2005
Members of Congress, egged on by American manufacturers, are threatening to slap punitive tariffs on Chinese goods unless China increases the exchange rate of its currency, the yuan, thus raising the price of Chinese imports here. Some Senate Democrats are even threatening to block President Bush's choice for the United States trade representative, Rob Portman, unless the administration also espouses get-tough tactics. This is protectionism raising its ugly head, and an all-around dreadful strategy. That's only in part because Mr. Portman, one of the president's better nominations, deserves confirmation. Worse, it's based on a misunderstanding of both China's financial situation and the cause of American economic woes.
At the heart of this debate is China's policy of linking the value of the yuan to the value of the dollar. That was called sound policy when the dollar was strong. But now that it is weak, Congressional critics call it manipulation because it makes already inexpensive Chinese goods even cheaper the world over. As proof that the yuan is undervalued, the tariff seekers point to the United States' ballooning trade deficit with China, which accounted for about one-fourth of the United States' gargantuan global trade imbalance of $617 billion in 2004.
The trade deficit and the loss of American manufacturing jobs are very serious problems. It would be nice to think that they would self-correct if China would only change its ways. Nice, but wrong. Most of the trade gap with China is caused by Americans' insatiable appetite for Chinese imports, for which there are few domestic substitutes. And even if the yuan's exchange rate is too low - a point on which economists differ - it is a minor contributor to the trade deficit. If China let the yuan appreciate by 20 percent, and most other Asian currencies followed suit, the deficit would probably decline by only about one-fifth over the next year or two. That's not nearly enough to bring the American trade imbalance into a range that is generally considered sustainable.
(More ... The New York Times > Opinion > Editorial: Blame China?) ¶ 23:59 0 comments
House Votes for Oil Drilling in an Alaska Wildlife Refuge (USATODAY.com)
Posted 4/20/2005 10:16 PM Updated 4/21/2005 2:30 AM
WASHINGTON (AP) — The House is set to approve an energy bill that would open an Alaska wildlife refuge to oil drilling and provide billions of dollars in benefits to energy industries, but critics say it does little to reduce the nation's thirst for oil.
The legislation, expected to be voted on by the House on Thursday, is certain to produce a confrontation with the Senate over protection of the Alaska refuge and over a provision in the bill that would help makers of a water-polluting gasoline additive deflect environmental lawsuits.
By a vote of 231-200, the House late Wednesday rejected an attempt to strip from the bill a section to allow oil drilling on the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in northeastern Alaska. The House has given the go-ahead for drilling there twice in the past four years, only see the issue die in the Senate each time.
The House bill also would shield the makers of MTBE, a gasoline additive that has prompted dozens of lawsuits over drinking water contamination, from defective product liability claims. The issue was blamed for scuttling energy legislation in the Senate in 2003.
(More ... USATODAY.com - House votes for oil drilling in an Alaska wildlife refuge) ¶ 23:54 0 comments
WASHINGTON (AP) — The House is set to approve an energy bill that would open an Alaska wildlife refuge to oil drilling and provide billions of dollars in benefits to energy industries, but critics say it does little to reduce the nation's thirst for oil.
The legislation, expected to be voted on by the House on Thursday, is certain to produce a confrontation with the Senate over protection of the Alaska refuge and over a provision in the bill that would help makers of a water-polluting gasoline additive deflect environmental lawsuits.
By a vote of 231-200, the House late Wednesday rejected an attempt to strip from the bill a section to allow oil drilling on the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in northeastern Alaska. The House has given the go-ahead for drilling there twice in the past four years, only see the issue die in the Senate each time.
The House bill also would shield the makers of MTBE, a gasoline additive that has prompted dozens of lawsuits over drinking water contamination, from defective product liability claims. The issue was blamed for scuttling energy legislation in the Senate in 2003.
(More ... USATODAY.com - House votes for oil drilling in an Alaska wildlife refuge) ¶ 23:54 0 comments
Sen. Jeffords Says He Plans to Step Down (WashingtonPost.com)
Vermont Independent Who Left GOP in 2001 Cites His and Wife's Health Issues
By Dan Morgan
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, April 21, 2005; Page A07
Sen. James Jeffords (I-Vt.), whose abrupt defection from the Republican Party in May 2001 handed control of the Senate to the Democrats for the next 19 months, announced yesterday that he would not seek a fourth term in 2006 due to his and his wife's health problems.
Jeffords, 70, in a surprise announcement in South Burlington, Vt., cited his own health, as well as the fact that his wife, Elizabeth, is battling cancer and will soon have to undergo another round of chemotherapy. He added that "my memory fails me on occasion, but [Elizabeth] would probably argue this has been going on for the last 50 years."
"I have had an enormously satisfying career, one that I would not have traded for any other," Jeffords said, his wife and two adult children at his side.
During a 30-year career in the House and Senate, Jeffords has sided with Democrats on such issues as health care, gun control, the environment and family and medical leave. He supported Vermont's law allowing civil unions for gay and lesbian couples.
(More ... Sen. Jeffords Says He Plans to Step Down (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 23:51 0 comments
By Dan Morgan
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, April 21, 2005; Page A07
Sen. James Jeffords (I-Vt.), whose abrupt defection from the Republican Party in May 2001 handed control of the Senate to the Democrats for the next 19 months, announced yesterday that he would not seek a fourth term in 2006 due to his and his wife's health problems.
Jeffords, 70, in a surprise announcement in South Burlington, Vt., cited his own health, as well as the fact that his wife, Elizabeth, is battling cancer and will soon have to undergo another round of chemotherapy. He added that "my memory fails me on occasion, but [Elizabeth] would probably argue this has been going on for the last 50 years."
"I have had an enormously satisfying career, one that I would not have traded for any other," Jeffords said, his wife and two adult children at his side.
During a 30-year career in the House and Senate, Jeffords has sided with Democrats on such issues as health care, gun control, the environment and family and medical leave. He supported Vermont's law allowing civil unions for gay and lesbian couples.
(More ... Sen. Jeffords Says He Plans to Step Down (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 23:51 0 comments
GOP Senator Wavers on Bolton (WashingtonPost.com)
Yes Vote Less Likely, Chafee Signals; White House Defends U.N. Nominee
By Charles Babington and Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, April 21, 2005; Page A02
A key Republican senator signaled yesterday that he is less likely to support the embattled nomination of John R. Bolton to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations after a dramatic meeting Tuesday, and said he will discuss with GOP colleagues whether President Bush should withdraw Bolton's name.
The White House, meanwhile, launched an aggressive campaign to salvage the nomination. Spokesman Scott McClellan accused Democrats of manufacturing charges to discredit Bolton and "score political points."
Sen. Lincoln D. Chafee (R-R.I.), a member of the Foreign Relations Committee that is weighing the nomination, "is less likely right now" to vote to confirm Bolton, his spokesman Stephen Hourahan said in an interview. The senator, he said, "wants to get to the bottom" of new allegations about Bolton's dealings with subordinates and classified information. Until Tuesday, when committee Democrats attacked Bolton's record and won a three-week extension to investigate it, Chafee repeatedly had said he was reluctantly inclined to vote for Bolton.
(More ... GOP Senator Wavers on Bolton (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 23:49 0 comments
By Charles Babington and Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, April 21, 2005; Page A02
A key Republican senator signaled yesterday that he is less likely to support the embattled nomination of John R. Bolton to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations after a dramatic meeting Tuesday, and said he will discuss with GOP colleagues whether President Bush should withdraw Bolton's name.
The White House, meanwhile, launched an aggressive campaign to salvage the nomination. Spokesman Scott McClellan accused Democrats of manufacturing charges to discredit Bolton and "score political points."
Sen. Lincoln D. Chafee (R-R.I.), a member of the Foreign Relations Committee that is weighing the nomination, "is less likely right now" to vote to confirm Bolton, his spokesman Stephen Hourahan said in an interview. The senator, he said, "wants to get to the bottom" of new allegations about Bolton's dealings with subordinates and classified information. Until Tuesday, when committee Democrats attacked Bolton's record and won a three-week extension to investigate it, Chafee repeatedly had said he was reluctantly inclined to vote for Bolton.
(More ... GOP Senator Wavers on Bolton (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 23:49 0 comments
The Symmetry Between Torture & Terror (Scoop.co.nz)
By Paul G. Buchanan
April 21, 2005
Revelations about torture of political prisoners held in US prisons in Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Iraq and the lower fifty have sparked debate about what is permissible in grey area, irregular conflicts such as the fight against Islamicist terrorism. Brutalisation of terrorist suspects and sympathisers is allowed by a raft of post 9-11 legislation that also authorises their indefinite detention without charge and the practice of “extraordinary rendition” (whereby those suspected of involvement in terrorist activities are refouled to the country of charge or origin, to be detained, interrogated and juridically administered under local conditions).
President Bush explicitly stated in the days immediately following the 9/11 attacks that the US would stop at nothing to locate, bring to justice or eliminate those who organized, sponsored, supported or in any way collaborated in the planning of those events, as well as previous assaults on US interests around the globe. He was roundly applauded at the time by the shell-shocked US public, and it was in that environment that the legal framework for handling terrorist suspects, along with the Patriot Act and Department of Homeland Security, were born.
Subsequent divisions over the use of torture in US detention centres have surfaced along the intersection of practical versus ethical considerations. Torture is considered to be a forced necessity imposed by the ungentlemanly nature of the opponent, or is seen as a moral indictment of the US approach to the “war on terror” that descends into the barbarism that it purports to fight. The subtext of the ethical debate swings both ways. Zealotry and unilateralism in the Bush administration are seen as evidence of both moral elevation or moral decay. Faith in the moral virtue of the current US leadership prevailed among its voting public in the November 2004 national elections (by 52 to 47 percent), something not that dissimilar from the vote totals received by Richard Nixon at the time of his re-election in 1972. Then and now it is comforting for the voting majority to know that the United States Government is legally justified in authorising acts that violate international conventions on the rules of engagement. For Nixon, legal justification of the secret extension of the Vietnam War into Cambodia was grounded on such a means-ends rationale, and so it is with today’s US approach to the war against Islamicist irregulars and jihadis.
(More ... Scoop: Buchanan: The Symmetry Between Torture & Terror) ¶ 19:09 0 comments
April 21, 2005
Revelations about torture of political prisoners held in US prisons in Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Iraq and the lower fifty have sparked debate about what is permissible in grey area, irregular conflicts such as the fight against Islamicist terrorism. Brutalisation of terrorist suspects and sympathisers is allowed by a raft of post 9-11 legislation that also authorises their indefinite detention without charge and the practice of “extraordinary rendition” (whereby those suspected of involvement in terrorist activities are refouled to the country of charge or origin, to be detained, interrogated and juridically administered under local conditions).
President Bush explicitly stated in the days immediately following the 9/11 attacks that the US would stop at nothing to locate, bring to justice or eliminate those who organized, sponsored, supported or in any way collaborated in the planning of those events, as well as previous assaults on US interests around the globe. He was roundly applauded at the time by the shell-shocked US public, and it was in that environment that the legal framework for handling terrorist suspects, along with the Patriot Act and Department of Homeland Security, were born.
Subsequent divisions over the use of torture in US detention centres have surfaced along the intersection of practical versus ethical considerations. Torture is considered to be a forced necessity imposed by the ungentlemanly nature of the opponent, or is seen as a moral indictment of the US approach to the “war on terror” that descends into the barbarism that it purports to fight. The subtext of the ethical debate swings both ways. Zealotry and unilateralism in the Bush administration are seen as evidence of both moral elevation or moral decay. Faith in the moral virtue of the current US leadership prevailed among its voting public in the November 2004 national elections (by 52 to 47 percent), something not that dissimilar from the vote totals received by Richard Nixon at the time of his re-election in 1972. Then and now it is comforting for the voting majority to know that the United States Government is legally justified in authorising acts that violate international conventions on the rules of engagement. For Nixon, legal justification of the secret extension of the Vietnam War into Cambodia was grounded on such a means-ends rationale, and so it is with today’s US approach to the war against Islamicist irregulars and jihadis.
(More ... Scoop: Buchanan: The Symmetry Between Torture & Terror) ¶ 19:09 0 comments
Voinovich Surprises Both Parties by Derailing Vote on U.N. Nominee (KansasCity.com)
BY JAMES KUHNHENN
Knight Ridder Newspapers
WASHINGTON - (KRT) - Republican Sen. George Voinovich of Ohio has a reputation as an unyielding fiscal hawk. He once voted against a water spending bill because it cost too much, even though it included a number of Ohio projects.
He's made a name for himself in the Senate - for better or worse - for bucking President Bush on tax cuts, arguing that they would increase budget deficits.
But few expected him to become a Republican thorn on Bush's foreign policy. Yet, that was his burden on Wednesday, a day after he derailed a Senate committee vote on John Bolton, Bush's nominee for United Nations ambassador.
Voinovich is a slight man with a weathered face and an unassuming manner. But he has more political experience than most senators. He's been the mayor of Cleveland, the governor of Ohio and is now the senator from one of the most crucial states in presidential politics.
During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing Tuesday, Voinovich stunned Republicans and Democrats by announcing that he was reluctant to vote right then for Bolton after hearing a litany of Democratic complaints against Bolton's management style and claims that he's bullied and threatened underlings.
"We come down here and we do what our hearts and our consciences tell us to," he said afterward.
(More ... KRT Wire | 04/20/2005 | Voinovich surprises both parties by derailing vote on U.N. nominee) ¶ 13:15 0 comments
Knight Ridder Newspapers
WASHINGTON - (KRT) - Republican Sen. George Voinovich of Ohio has a reputation as an unyielding fiscal hawk. He once voted against a water spending bill because it cost too much, even though it included a number of Ohio projects.
He's made a name for himself in the Senate - for better or worse - for bucking President Bush on tax cuts, arguing that they would increase budget deficits.
But few expected him to become a Republican thorn on Bush's foreign policy. Yet, that was his burden on Wednesday, a day after he derailed a Senate committee vote on John Bolton, Bush's nominee for United Nations ambassador.
Voinovich is a slight man with a weathered face and an unassuming manner. But he has more political experience than most senators. He's been the mayor of Cleveland, the governor of Ohio and is now the senator from one of the most crucial states in presidential politics.
During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing Tuesday, Voinovich stunned Republicans and Democrats by announcing that he was reluctant to vote right then for Bolton after hearing a litany of Democratic complaints against Bolton's management style and claims that he's bullied and threatened underlings.
"We come down here and we do what our hearts and our consciences tell us to," he said afterward.
(More ... KRT Wire | 04/20/2005 | Voinovich surprises both parties by derailing vote on U.N. nominee) ¶ 13:15 0 comments
4.20.2005
Democrats On DeLay Debris: It’s De-Lovely (Observer.com)
By Ben Smith
April 20, 2005
The deepening reds and blues of America’s political map are making it harder and harder to be a Republican member of Congress from New York.
Republicans widened their majority in the House of Representatives by 11 seats between 2000 and 2004, but New York is heading in the other direction, with the Democrats picking up one seat in 2002 and another last year.
As a result, New York’s Democrats and their allies smell blood. The party is poised to field a ticket next year headed by Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and gubernatorial nominee-apparent Eliot Spitzer. Meanwhile, Republicans find themselves on the defensive on issues ranging from Social Security to ethics. The latter controversy has taken on a special urgency as scandal continues to swirl around House Majority Leader Tom DeLay of Texas.
What’s more, the party in control of the White House generally loses seats in mid-term elections. All of this could spell trouble for some of the state’s nine remaining Republican members of Congress in 2006.
(More ... Democrats On DeLay Debris: It’s De-Lovely) ¶ 12:39 0 comments
April 20, 2005
The deepening reds and blues of America’s political map are making it harder and harder to be a Republican member of Congress from New York.
Republicans widened their majority in the House of Representatives by 11 seats between 2000 and 2004, but New York is heading in the other direction, with the Democrats picking up one seat in 2002 and another last year.
As a result, New York’s Democrats and their allies smell blood. The party is poised to field a ticket next year headed by Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and gubernatorial nominee-apparent Eliot Spitzer. Meanwhile, Republicans find themselves on the defensive on issues ranging from Social Security to ethics. The latter controversy has taken on a special urgency as scandal continues to swirl around House Majority Leader Tom DeLay of Texas.
What’s more, the party in control of the White House generally loses seats in mid-term elections. All of this could spell trouble for some of the state’s nine remaining Republican members of Congress in 2006.
(More ... Democrats On DeLay Debris: It’s De-Lovely) ¶ 12:39 0 comments
The Costs of Secrecy (WashingtonPost.com)
EDITORIAL
Monday, April 18, 2005; Page A16
"THE PRESUMPTION ought to be that citizens ought to know as much as possible about decision making," President Bush told the convention of the American Society of Newspaper Editors last week when asked about his administration's tight controls on information. "I know there is a feeling that we are too security-conscious. I think we are becoming balanced."
The assumption underlying this remark is that secrecy and security go hand in hand and that openness in government carries risks. This is certainly often true; yet what's less recognized is that secrecy can be harmful, not only to democratic values but to national security as well, because it can impede the flow of information to those who need it. Recently the National Academy of Sciences, as part of a report on the security of spent fuel at nuclear plants, provided an example, noting that "security restrictions on sharing of information and analyses are hindering progress in addressing potential vulnerabilities."
(More ... The Costs of Secrecy (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 08:16 0 comments
Monday, April 18, 2005; Page A16
"THE PRESUMPTION ought to be that citizens ought to know as much as possible about decision making," President Bush told the convention of the American Society of Newspaper Editors last week when asked about his administration's tight controls on information. "I know there is a feeling that we are too security-conscious. I think we are becoming balanced."
The assumption underlying this remark is that secrecy and security go hand in hand and that openness in government carries risks. This is certainly often true; yet what's less recognized is that secrecy can be harmful, not only to democratic values but to national security as well, because it can impede the flow of information to those who need it. Recently the National Academy of Sciences, as part of a report on the security of spent fuel at nuclear plants, provided an example, noting that "security restrictions on sharing of information and analyses are hindering progress in addressing potential vulnerabilities."
(More ... The Costs of Secrecy (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 08:16 0 comments
The Dollar Danger (WashingtonPost.com)
EDITORIAL
Tuesday, April 19, 2005; Page A18
TREASURY Secretary John W. Snow did his best to sound serious over the weekend about the fault lines in the world economy. He called on China to stop pegging its currency to the dollar, a reform intended to allow the Chinese currency to rise, easing the flood of cheap exports that contributes to the record U.S. trade deficit. At the same time, Mr. Snow promised cuts in the U.S. budget deficit, which would reduce the nation's consumption, including the consumption of imports; Japan and the European Union were urged to promote growth, which would suck in U.S. exports. All of these reforms are intended to bring the nation's trade deficit back toward balance. If they fail, markets may cut the trade deficit in their own blunt way -- via a precipitous collapse of the dollar.
The problem is that nobody believes Mr. Snow's rhetoric. He reiterated the administration's plan to cut the deficit to less than 2 percent of gross domestic product, down from 3.6 percent last year. But this plan leaves out the cost of operations in Iraq and the general war on terrorism, and it assumes no reform of the alternative minimum tax and no rise in federal spending. Using more plausible assumptions, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities expects the budget deficit to hit a low of 2.5 percent in 2010 and then start rising again.
(More ... The Dollar Danger (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 08:14 0 comments
Tuesday, April 19, 2005; Page A18
TREASURY Secretary John W. Snow did his best to sound serious over the weekend about the fault lines in the world economy. He called on China to stop pegging its currency to the dollar, a reform intended to allow the Chinese currency to rise, easing the flood of cheap exports that contributes to the record U.S. trade deficit. At the same time, Mr. Snow promised cuts in the U.S. budget deficit, which would reduce the nation's consumption, including the consumption of imports; Japan and the European Union were urged to promote growth, which would suck in U.S. exports. All of these reforms are intended to bring the nation's trade deficit back toward balance. If they fail, markets may cut the trade deficit in their own blunt way -- via a precipitous collapse of the dollar.
The problem is that nobody believes Mr. Snow's rhetoric. He reiterated the administration's plan to cut the deficit to less than 2 percent of gross domestic product, down from 3.6 percent last year. But this plan leaves out the cost of operations in Iraq and the general war on terrorism, and it assumes no reform of the alternative minimum tax and no rise in federal spending. Using more plausible assumptions, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities expects the budget deficit to hit a low of 2.5 percent in 2010 and then start rising again.
(More ... The Dollar Danger (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 08:14 0 comments
Pentagon Nominees Vows to Review Arms Buying Process (Reuters.com)
By Andrea Shalal-Esa
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon is facing sharply rising costs for warships, combat aircraft and other weapons systems and needs to simplify its cumbersome arms purchasing procedures, President Bush's choice to be deputy defense secretary said on Tuesday
"Our cost in every single weapons system has gone up dramatically -- and has gone up dramatically above the inflation rates," Navy Secretary Gordon England told the Senate Armed Services Committee at his confirmation hearing.
"We do need to look at the whole acquisition area," the former defense industry executive said. "Be assured that this will receive my highest attention."
England, 67, nominated to succeed Paul Wolfowitz as the No. 2 official at the Pentagon, spoke as senators from both parties raised concerns about the rising costs of warships and fighter jets and whether the Navy could afford to buy planned numbers of revolutionary vessels.
England, a trusted confidant of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, is expected to win easy approval by the Senate.
(More ... Politics News Article | Reuters.com) ¶ 08:12 0 comments
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon is facing sharply rising costs for warships, combat aircraft and other weapons systems and needs to simplify its cumbersome arms purchasing procedures, President Bush's choice to be deputy defense secretary said on Tuesday
"Our cost in every single weapons system has gone up dramatically -- and has gone up dramatically above the inflation rates," Navy Secretary Gordon England told the Senate Armed Services Committee at his confirmation hearing.
"We do need to look at the whole acquisition area," the former defense industry executive said. "Be assured that this will receive my highest attention."
England, 67, nominated to succeed Paul Wolfowitz as the No. 2 official at the Pentagon, spoke as senators from both parties raised concerns about the rising costs of warships and fighter jets and whether the Navy could afford to buy planned numbers of revolutionary vessels.
England, a trusted confidant of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, is expected to win easy approval by the Senate.
(More ... Politics News Article | Reuters.com) ¶ 08:12 0 comments
Lugar: Bolton Nomination Likely to Pass Commitee (Reuters.com)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - New allegations of bureaucratic bullying are unlikely to change minds on the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations committee over whether to confirm John Bolton as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, the Republican chairman said on Sunday.
Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana said he would press ahead with the committee vote set for Tuesday, while the leading Democrat on the panel, Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, said Democrats were waiting for further responses from Bolton before deciding whether to demand more hearings.
"Hopefully not, but we're waiting for Bolton's answers to find out whether or not he's giving us honest responses," Biden said on "Fox News Sunday."
"I think his credibility is in question," he added.
Bolton, the top U.S. diplomat for arms control, has been accused during his confirmation hearings over the past week of berating and threatening intelligence staffers who disagreed with him.
(More ... Top News Article | Reuters.com) ¶ 08:10 0 comments
Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana said he would press ahead with the committee vote set for Tuesday, while the leading Democrat on the panel, Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, said Democrats were waiting for further responses from Bolton before deciding whether to demand more hearings.
"Hopefully not, but we're waiting for Bolton's answers to find out whether or not he's giving us honest responses," Biden said on "Fox News Sunday."
"I think his credibility is in question," he added.
Bolton, the top U.S. diplomat for arms control, has been accused during his confirmation hearings over the past week of berating and threatening intelligence staffers who disagreed with him.
(More ... Top News Article | Reuters.com) ¶ 08:10 0 comments
Psst ... Justice Scalia ... You Know, You're an Activist Judge, Too (NYTimes.com)
EDITORIAL OBSERVER
By ADAM COHEN
Published: April 19, 2005
Not since the 1960's, when federal judges in the South were threatened by cross burnings and firebombs, have judges been so besieged. Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas, set off a furor when he said judges could be inviting physical attacks with controversial decisions. And last week the House majority leader, Tom DeLay, called for an investigation of the federal judges in the Terri Schiavo case, saying ominously: "We set up the courts. We can unset the courts."
Conservatives claim that they are rising up against "activist judges," who decide cases based on their personal beliefs rather than the law. They frequently point to Justice Antonin Scalia as a model of honest, "strict constructionist" judging. And Justice Scalia has eagerly embraced the hero's role. Last month, after the Supreme Court struck down the death penalty for those under 18, he lashed out at his colleagues for using the idea of a "living Constitution" that evolves over time to hand down political decisions - something he says he would never do.
The idea that liberal judges are advocates and partisans while judges like Justice Scalia are not is being touted everywhere these days, and it is pure myth. Justice Scalia has been more than willing to ignore the Constitution's plain language, and he has a knack for coming out on the conservative side in cases with an ideological bent. The conservative partisans leading the war on activist judges are just as inconsistent: they like judicial activism just fine when it advances their own agendas.
Justice Scalia's views on federalism - which now generally command a majority on the Supreme Court - are perhaps the clearest example of the problem with the conservative attack on judicial activism. When conservatives complain about activist judges, they talk about gay marriage and defendants' rights. But they do not mention the 11th Amendment, which has been twisted beyond its own plain words into a states' rights weapon to throw minorities, women and the disabled out of federal court.
(More ... The New York Times > Opinion > Editorial Observer: Psst ... Justice Scalia ... You Know, You're an Activist Judge, Too) ¶ 08:08 0 comments
By ADAM COHEN
Published: April 19, 2005
Not since the 1960's, when federal judges in the South were threatened by cross burnings and firebombs, have judges been so besieged. Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas, set off a furor when he said judges could be inviting physical attacks with controversial decisions. And last week the House majority leader, Tom DeLay, called for an investigation of the federal judges in the Terri Schiavo case, saying ominously: "We set up the courts. We can unset the courts."
Conservatives claim that they are rising up against "activist judges," who decide cases based on their personal beliefs rather than the law. They frequently point to Justice Antonin Scalia as a model of honest, "strict constructionist" judging. And Justice Scalia has eagerly embraced the hero's role. Last month, after the Supreme Court struck down the death penalty for those under 18, he lashed out at his colleagues for using the idea of a "living Constitution" that evolves over time to hand down political decisions - something he says he would never do.
The idea that liberal judges are advocates and partisans while judges like Justice Scalia are not is being touted everywhere these days, and it is pure myth. Justice Scalia has been more than willing to ignore the Constitution's plain language, and he has a knack for coming out on the conservative side in cases with an ideological bent. The conservative partisans leading the war on activist judges are just as inconsistent: they like judicial activism just fine when it advances their own agendas.
Justice Scalia's views on federalism - which now generally command a majority on the Supreme Court - are perhaps the clearest example of the problem with the conservative attack on judicial activism. When conservatives complain about activist judges, they talk about gay marriage and defendants' rights. But they do not mention the 11th Amendment, which has been twisted beyond its own plain words into a states' rights weapon to throw minorities, women and the disabled out of federal court.
(More ... The New York Times > Opinion > Editorial Observer: Psst ... Justice Scalia ... You Know, You're an Activist Judge, Too) ¶ 08:08 0 comments
Senator Clinton Piles Up a Fund-Raising Lead for 2006 (NYTimes.com)
By RAYMOND HERNANDEZ
Published: April 19, 2005
WASHINGTON, April 18 - Even as Republicans struggle to find a candidate to challenge Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York next year, she has embarked on a furious fund-raising drive that appears to have left her with a larger reserve of cash than any other senator seeking re-election.
Her campaign reported on Monday that she had amassed nearly $4 million in contributions in the first three months of this year, meaning that she will close the first quarter with $8.7 million in the bank.
Mrs. Clinton's advisers are reluctant to say what the senator's fund-raising goal is for the 2006 re-election campaign. But she raised and spent roughly $30 million in 2000, when she won Daniel Patrick Moynihan's old seat in the most expensive Senate race in New York history, according to campaign finance disclosure records.
This time around, Mrs. Clinton, whose popularity rating in New York is soaring, may end up facing only token opposition. But Republicans are nevertheless vowing to spend millions to attack her, no matter who her opponent is, because she is considered a leading presidential contender in 2008.
(More ... The New York Times > New York Region > Metro Campaigns > Senator Clinton Piles Up a Fund-Raising Lead for 2006) ¶ 08:07 0 comments
Published: April 19, 2005
WASHINGTON, April 18 - Even as Republicans struggle to find a candidate to challenge Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York next year, she has embarked on a furious fund-raising drive that appears to have left her with a larger reserve of cash than any other senator seeking re-election.
Her campaign reported on Monday that she had amassed nearly $4 million in contributions in the first three months of this year, meaning that she will close the first quarter with $8.7 million in the bank.
Mrs. Clinton's advisers are reluctant to say what the senator's fund-raising goal is for the 2006 re-election campaign. But she raised and spent roughly $30 million in 2000, when she won Daniel Patrick Moynihan's old seat in the most expensive Senate race in New York history, according to campaign finance disclosure records.
This time around, Mrs. Clinton, whose popularity rating in New York is soaring, may end up facing only token opposition. But Republicans are nevertheless vowing to spend millions to attack her, no matter who her opponent is, because she is considered a leading presidential contender in 2008.
(More ... The New York Times > New York Region > Metro Campaigns > Senator Clinton Piles Up a Fund-Raising Lead for 2006) ¶ 08:07 0 comments
4.18.2005
Power for Power's Sake (NYTimes.com)
EDITORIAL
Published: April 17, 2005
When power and leadership come to politicians incapable of handling either, the results can be disastrous. The Democrats who controlled Congress into the 1990's grew so comfortable with their majority that they lost track of the country. As House speaker, Newt Gingrich sacrificed his revolution to his swollen ego. And now there is Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, whose hunger for power has grown so insatiable that it has detached him from the nation's business, the principles of electoral democracy and even the mainstream of his own party.
Mr. DeLay's ethical and financial lapses are serious and disqualifying for his high office. But even more alarming than his love for political money is his abuse of power. He appears to be confused about the difference between a legislative majority won in an election and total control held indefinitely.
(More ... The New York Times > Opinion > Editorial: Power for Power's Sake) ¶ 08:10 0 comments
Published: April 17, 2005
When power and leadership come to politicians incapable of handling either, the results can be disastrous. The Democrats who controlled Congress into the 1990's grew so comfortable with their majority that they lost track of the country. As House speaker, Newt Gingrich sacrificed his revolution to his swollen ego. And now there is Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, whose hunger for power has grown so insatiable that it has detached him from the nation's business, the principles of electoral democracy and even the mainstream of his own party.
Mr. DeLay's ethical and financial lapses are serious and disqualifying for his high office. But even more alarming than his love for political money is his abuse of power. He appears to be confused about the difference between a legislative majority won in an election and total control held indefinitely.
(More ... The New York Times > Opinion > Editorial: Power for Power's Sake) ¶ 08:10 0 comments
4.16.2005
Detainees? What Detainees? (IPSNews.net)
By William Fisher
NEW YORK, Apr 13 (IPS) - The U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, the military's most senior leaders, want Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to approve new guidelines that will formalise the George W. Bush administration's policy of imprisoning so-called enemy combatants without the protections of the Geneva Conventions and enable the Pentagon to legally hold ”ghost detainees”, a human rights group is charging.
In a letter to Rumsfeld, advocacy group Human Rights Watch (HRW) said, ”Denying the protections of the Geneva Conventions to persons apprehended in the global war on terror is unsupported as a matter of law, represents a radical deviation from the standards that have traditionally guided U.S. military operations, and places U.S. service members and civilians detained by enemy forces at greater risk of mistreatment.”
The new memorandum, now in final draft, is known as the ”Joint Doctrine for Detainee Operations: Joint Publication 3-63”, and is dated Mar. 23, 2005.
”If the draft memorandum is approved, it will formalise 'enemy combatant' as a class of prisoner that the Bush administration says has no protections under the Geneva Conventions,” HRW attorney John Sifton told IPS. ”There are no categories of prisoners unprotected by one or another of the Geneva Convention.”
An additional concern, he said, is that the draft memorandum would give the military authority to classify as an enemy combatant anyone whose name appears on a government watchlist.
”The proposed watchlist includes a wide variety of groups from Sikhs to followers of Peru's Shining Path, and potentially hundreds of thousands of people named Ahmed or Mohamed. This is a huge and radical departure that could further erode the rule of law.”
(More ... RIGHTS-US: Detainees? What Detainees?) ¶ 14:47 0 comments
NEW YORK, Apr 13 (IPS) - The U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, the military's most senior leaders, want Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to approve new guidelines that will formalise the George W. Bush administration's policy of imprisoning so-called enemy combatants without the protections of the Geneva Conventions and enable the Pentagon to legally hold ”ghost detainees”, a human rights group is charging.
In a letter to Rumsfeld, advocacy group Human Rights Watch (HRW) said, ”Denying the protections of the Geneva Conventions to persons apprehended in the global war on terror is unsupported as a matter of law, represents a radical deviation from the standards that have traditionally guided U.S. military operations, and places U.S. service members and civilians detained by enemy forces at greater risk of mistreatment.”
The new memorandum, now in final draft, is known as the ”Joint Doctrine for Detainee Operations: Joint Publication 3-63”, and is dated Mar. 23, 2005.
”If the draft memorandum is approved, it will formalise 'enemy combatant' as a class of prisoner that the Bush administration says has no protections under the Geneva Conventions,” HRW attorney John Sifton told IPS. ”There are no categories of prisoners unprotected by one or another of the Geneva Convention.”
An additional concern, he said, is that the draft memorandum would give the military authority to classify as an enemy combatant anyone whose name appears on a government watchlist.
”The proposed watchlist includes a wide variety of groups from Sikhs to followers of Peru's Shining Path, and potentially hundreds of thousands of people named Ahmed or Mohamed. This is a huge and radical departure that could further erode the rule of law.”
(More ... RIGHTS-US: Detainees? What Detainees?) ¶ 14:47 0 comments
The Rise of Disaster Capitalism (TheNation.com)
By Naomi Klein
from the May 2, 2005 issue of The Nation
Last summer, in the lull of the August media doze, the Bush Administration's doctrine of preventive war took a major leap forward. On August 5, 2004, the White House created the Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization, headed by former US Ambassador to Ukraine Carlos Pascual. Its mandate is to draw up elaborate "post-conflict" plans for up to twenty-five countries that are not, as of yet, in conflict. According to Pascual, it will also be able to coordinate three full-scale reconstruction operations in different countries "at the same time," each lasting "five to seven years."
Fittingly, a government devoted to perpetual pre-emptive deconstruction now has a standing office of perpetual pre-emptive reconstruction.
Gone are the days of waiting for wars to break out and then drawing up ad hoc plans to pick up the pieces. In close cooperation with the National Intelligence Council, Pascual's office keeps "high risk" countries on a "watch list" and assembles rapid-response teams ready to engage in prewar planning and to "mobilize and deploy quickly" after a conflict has gone down. The teams are made up of private companies, nongovernmental organizations and members of think tanks--some, Pascual told an audience at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in October, will have "pre-completed" contracts to rebuild countries that are not yet broken. Doing this paperwork in advance could "cut off three to six months in your response time."
The plans Pascual's teams have been drawing up in his little-known office in the State Department are about changing "the very social fabric of a nation," he told CSIS. The office's mandate is not to rebuild any old states, you see, but to create "democratic and market-oriented" ones. So, for instance (and he was just pulling this example out of his hat, no doubt), his fast-acting reconstructors might help sell off "state-owned enterprises that created a nonviable economy." Sometimes rebuilding, he explained, means "tearing apart the old."
(More ... The Nation | Column | The Rise of Disaster Capitalism | Naomi Klein) ¶ 14:41 0 comments
from the May 2, 2005 issue of The Nation
Last summer, in the lull of the August media doze, the Bush Administration's doctrine of preventive war took a major leap forward. On August 5, 2004, the White House created the Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization, headed by former US Ambassador to Ukraine Carlos Pascual. Its mandate is to draw up elaborate "post-conflict" plans for up to twenty-five countries that are not, as of yet, in conflict. According to Pascual, it will also be able to coordinate three full-scale reconstruction operations in different countries "at the same time," each lasting "five to seven years."
Fittingly, a government devoted to perpetual pre-emptive deconstruction now has a standing office of perpetual pre-emptive reconstruction.
Gone are the days of waiting for wars to break out and then drawing up ad hoc plans to pick up the pieces. In close cooperation with the National Intelligence Council, Pascual's office keeps "high risk" countries on a "watch list" and assembles rapid-response teams ready to engage in prewar planning and to "mobilize and deploy quickly" after a conflict has gone down. The teams are made up of private companies, nongovernmental organizations and members of think tanks--some, Pascual told an audience at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in October, will have "pre-completed" contracts to rebuild countries that are not yet broken. Doing this paperwork in advance could "cut off three to six months in your response time."
The plans Pascual's teams have been drawing up in his little-known office in the State Department are about changing "the very social fabric of a nation," he told CSIS. The office's mandate is not to rebuild any old states, you see, but to create "democratic and market-oriented" ones. So, for instance (and he was just pulling this example out of his hat, no doubt), his fast-acting reconstructors might help sell off "state-owned enterprises that created a nonviable economy." Sometimes rebuilding, he explained, means "tearing apart the old."
(More ... The Nation | Column | The Rise of Disaster Capitalism | Naomi Klein) ¶ 14:41 0 comments
Climate Change Wreaking Havoc With the Seasons (Independent.co.uk)
By Matthew Beard
15 April 2005
Climate change is playing havoc with the timing of the seasons and could drastically alter the landscape, according to one of the most comprehensive studies of its kind.
Frogs have begun spawning in Britain as early as October, oaks are coming into leaf three weeks earlier than they were 50 years ago and there were an unprecedented 4,000 sightings of bumblebees by the end of January this year.
Scientists, who also noted that people were mowing their lawns earlier, have concluded that spring now arrives ahead of schedule.
The findings were submitted to scientists at the UK Phenology Network by hundreds of paid observers across the country and have been combined with environmental data over three centuries. The study is bound to intensify calls for tighter controls on environmental pollution linked to climate change.
The report, published yesterday in the BBC Wildlife Magazine, provides startling evidence of how nature is reacting to rising temperatures and changing rainfall patterns. Authors of the report have calculated that spring starts around six days earlier for every 1C temperature rise but not all species are affected in the same way.
(More ...News) ¶ 14:33 0 comments
15 April 2005
Climate change is playing havoc with the timing of the seasons and could drastically alter the landscape, according to one of the most comprehensive studies of its kind.
Frogs have begun spawning in Britain as early as October, oaks are coming into leaf three weeks earlier than they were 50 years ago and there were an unprecedented 4,000 sightings of bumblebees by the end of January this year.
Scientists, who also noted that people were mowing their lawns earlier, have concluded that spring now arrives ahead of schedule.
The findings were submitted to scientists at the UK Phenology Network by hundreds of paid observers across the country and have been combined with environmental data over three centuries. The study is bound to intensify calls for tighter controls on environmental pollution linked to climate change.
The report, published yesterday in the BBC Wildlife Magazine, provides startling evidence of how nature is reacting to rising temperatures and changing rainfall patterns. Authors of the report have calculated that spring starts around six days earlier for every 1C temperature rise but not all species are affected in the same way.
(More ...News) ¶ 14:33 0 comments
4.13.2005
Repeal the Gay Ban (WashingtonPost.com)
EDITORIAL
Wednesday, April 13, 2005; Page A16
ARMY SGT. ROBERT Stout received a Purple Heart after an exploding grenade in Iraq last May left shrapnel in his face, arm and legs. He would like to remain in the military, and he said in an interview that he would reenlist were it not for the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. But Sgt. Stout is through denying that he is gay, so he recently declared his sexual orientation to the Associated Press. Now he'll be lucky if he's allowed to serve out his tour, which ends in May, without being kicked out of the service. For under U.S. policy, even the most decorated and patriotic gay soldier is just a homosexual to be rooted out at the military's earliest convenience.
The military wastes a lot of money making sure that gay soldiers are either deeply closeted or ex-soldiers. According to a recent report by the Government Accountability Office, the services have spent $190 million recruiting and training replacements for gay service members kicked out during the past 10 years. More than 750 of the 9,488 men and women discharged from the military during that time, moreover, "held critical occupations"; many had training in languages important to the war on terrorism. The gay ban, in other words, is as self-defeating as it is demeaning to people who want to serve their country at a time of great need. It is long past time for it to go.
(More ... Repeal the Gay Ban (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 22:02 0 comments
Wednesday, April 13, 2005; Page A16
ARMY SGT. ROBERT Stout received a Purple Heart after an exploding grenade in Iraq last May left shrapnel in his face, arm and legs. He would like to remain in the military, and he said in an interview that he would reenlist were it not for the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. But Sgt. Stout is through denying that he is gay, so he recently declared his sexual orientation to the Associated Press. Now he'll be lucky if he's allowed to serve out his tour, which ends in May, without being kicked out of the service. For under U.S. policy, even the most decorated and patriotic gay soldier is just a homosexual to be rooted out at the military's earliest convenience.
The military wastes a lot of money making sure that gay soldiers are either deeply closeted or ex-soldiers. According to a recent report by the Government Accountability Office, the services have spent $190 million recruiting and training replacements for gay service members kicked out during the past 10 years. More than 750 of the 9,488 men and women discharged from the military during that time, moreover, "held critical occupations"; many had training in languages important to the war on terrorism. The gay ban, in other words, is as self-defeating as it is demeaning to people who want to serve their country at a time of great need. It is long past time for it to go.
(More ... Repeal the Gay Ban (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 22:02 0 comments
Will Democrats Seize the Opening? (WashingtonPost.com)
By David Ignatius
Wednesday, April 13, 2005; Page A17
The Republican Party, seemingly intent on squandering its 2004 election gains, is handing the Democrats a golden opportunity to restore their credentials as a governing party. To seize the moment, the Democrats must do what the Republicans have been avoiding -- which is to get serious about the nation's economic problems.
The Republicans lately have exhibited many of the unpleasant traits that got the Democrats in trouble over the past generation. With their attempts to impose political solutions to private moral issues, they come across as meddlesome busybodies who want to run other people's lives. Americans didn't like self-righteous scolding when it came from liberals, and they don't like it now from conservatives.
Life as the governing party has been as corrosive for the GOP as it was for the Democrats during their era of dominance. That's the real import of the Tom DeLay case; it's not that the House majority leader is uniquely unethical but that his lapses are so reminiscent of what the Democratic grandees did back when they ruled Capitol Hill. Reading the recent headlines about lobbyists run amok, you can't help but remember the bad old days of Lyndon Johnson, Bobby Baker, Wilbur Mills and Jim Wright. Even those Democratic oligarchs would have quailed at DeLay's attempt to pack the House ethics committee with pliant cronies.
(More ... Will Democrats Seize the Opening? (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 21:58 0 comments
Wednesday, April 13, 2005; Page A17
The Republican Party, seemingly intent on squandering its 2004 election gains, is handing the Democrats a golden opportunity to restore their credentials as a governing party. To seize the moment, the Democrats must do what the Republicans have been avoiding -- which is to get serious about the nation's economic problems.
The Republicans lately have exhibited many of the unpleasant traits that got the Democrats in trouble over the past generation. With their attempts to impose political solutions to private moral issues, they come across as meddlesome busybodies who want to run other people's lives. Americans didn't like self-righteous scolding when it came from liberals, and they don't like it now from conservatives.
Life as the governing party has been as corrosive for the GOP as it was for the Democrats during their era of dominance. That's the real import of the Tom DeLay case; it's not that the House majority leader is uniquely unethical but that his lapses are so reminiscent of what the Democratic grandees did back when they ruled Capitol Hill. Reading the recent headlines about lobbyists run amok, you can't help but remember the bad old days of Lyndon Johnson, Bobby Baker, Wilbur Mills and Jim Wright. Even those Democratic oligarchs would have quailed at DeLay's attempt to pack the House ethics committee with pliant cronies.
(More ... Will Democrats Seize the Opening? (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 21:58 0 comments
Former State Dept. Official Blasts Bolton (WashingtonPost.com)
By Barry Schweid
The Associated Press
Tuesday, April 12, 2005; 3:30 PM
A former chief of the State Department's bureau of intelligence and research castigated John R. Bolton on Tuesday as a "kiss-up, kick-down sort of guy" who abused analysts who disagreed with him on Cuba. A Democrat said he "needs anger management."
But the pivotal Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, said he was "still inclined" to vote to confirm Bolton as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. The Constitution gives President Bush considerable leeway to name ambassadors and "I see the bar as very high" for rejecting his choices, Chafee told reporters after the hearing was adjourned.
With Republicans in the majority, Bolton's nomination could clear the committee on Thursday or early next week and go to the Senate with the committee's approval. Bolton's greater vulnerability is at the committee level because Republicans outnumber Democrats there only 10-8. They have a safer margin of strength in the Senate.
(More ... Former State Dept. Official Blasts Bolton (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 08:10 0 comments
The Associated Press
Tuesday, April 12, 2005; 3:30 PM
A former chief of the State Department's bureau of intelligence and research castigated John R. Bolton on Tuesday as a "kiss-up, kick-down sort of guy" who abused analysts who disagreed with him on Cuba. A Democrat said he "needs anger management."
But the pivotal Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, said he was "still inclined" to vote to confirm Bolton as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. The Constitution gives President Bush considerable leeway to name ambassadors and "I see the bar as very high" for rejecting his choices, Chafee told reporters after the hearing was adjourned.
With Republicans in the majority, Bolton's nomination could clear the committee on Thursday or early next week and go to the Senate with the committee's approval. Bolton's greater vulnerability is at the committee level because Republicans outnumber Democrats there only 10-8. They have a safer margin of strength in the Senate.
(More ... Former State Dept. Official Blasts Bolton (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 08:10 0 comments
Bolton Gets Support from Conservative Anti-UN Ads (Reuters.com)
Tuesday, April 12, 2005
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Anxious to counter Democratic efforts to block John Bolton's chances of becoming U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, a conservative advocacy group is running television ads this week to promote his nomination.
Called Move America Forward, the California-based group has also launched television ads that decry the United Nations as a corrupt body that hates the United States.
"The main goal with the John Bolton ad is to show that he is a great nominee for U.N. ambassador. He's plain spoken and will represent U.S. interests to the U.N. as opposed to representing those of the U.N.," said Siobhan Guiney, executive director of the group, on Tuesday.
Guiney said several ads had run this week nationwide in support of Bolton to coincide with his nomination hearings on Capitol Hill, where he has come under fire by Democrats who criticize what they see as a "go-it-alone" foreign policy.
"I think our ads are helpful. Most people recognize that the United Nations is a fraudulent organization and in need of reform," she said.
(More ... Politics News Article | Reuters.com) ¶ 07:59 0 comments
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Anxious to counter Democratic efforts to block John Bolton's chances of becoming U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, a conservative advocacy group is running television ads this week to promote his nomination.
Called Move America Forward, the California-based group has also launched television ads that decry the United Nations as a corrupt body that hates the United States.
"The main goal with the John Bolton ad is to show that he is a great nominee for U.N. ambassador. He's plain spoken and will represent U.S. interests to the U.N. as opposed to representing those of the U.N.," said Siobhan Guiney, executive director of the group, on Tuesday.
Guiney said several ads had run this week nationwide in support of Bolton to coincide with his nomination hearings on Capitol Hill, where he has come under fire by Democrats who criticize what they see as a "go-it-alone" foreign policy.
"I think our ads are helpful. Most people recognize that the United Nations is a fraudulent organization and in need of reform," she said.
(More ... Politics News Article | Reuters.com) ¶ 07:59 0 comments
4.12.2005
Children in Combat (WashingtonPost.com)
EDITORIAL
Tuesday, April 12, 2005; Page A20
THERE IS MUCH that the United Nations cannot be expected to do, but it can focus attention on human rights issues, particularly in lawless places where nobody else has much influence. For the past several years, the U.N. Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict, Olara Otunnu, has been building a framework to put pressure on armies that send children into battle, particularly in the kinds of places where neither the laws of war nor generally accepted standards have penetrated. According to information he has compiled during travels to Colombia, Sri Lanka, Congo and elsewhere, more than 250,000 children are exploited in conflict, as child soldiers and porters, spies and sex slaves. In the past decade, more than 2 million children have been killed in battle, and more than 6 million have been injured.
Mr. Otunnu has now presented his report on child combatants to the U.N. Security Council. Unusually, for a U.N. document, it names names, concluding with a list of offenders. Very unusually for the United Nations, which is rarely involved in internal conflicts, it lists both governments and insurgent rebel groups that exploit children. Among them are the Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka, the Janjaweed of Sudan, the Communist party of Nepal, as well as both irregular rebel forces and government forces in Uganda, Burma and Congo. Mr. Otunnu proposes specific actions, mostly involving careful, continued monitoring of these conflicts by existing regional and U.N. authorities. Already, he says, his list has generated a reaction from groups that 10 years ago might have ignored international criticisms. Because they rely on international connections for weapons, supplies and support, and because many hope to take power, they appear more sensitive to U.N. criticism than might have been expected. This is "more than just words," he says. "This is concrete, tangible."
(More ... Children in Combat (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 19:43 0 comments
Tuesday, April 12, 2005; Page A20
THERE IS MUCH that the United Nations cannot be expected to do, but it can focus attention on human rights issues, particularly in lawless places where nobody else has much influence. For the past several years, the U.N. Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict, Olara Otunnu, has been building a framework to put pressure on armies that send children into battle, particularly in the kinds of places where neither the laws of war nor generally accepted standards have penetrated. According to information he has compiled during travels to Colombia, Sri Lanka, Congo and elsewhere, more than 250,000 children are exploited in conflict, as child soldiers and porters, spies and sex slaves. In the past decade, more than 2 million children have been killed in battle, and more than 6 million have been injured.
Mr. Otunnu has now presented his report on child combatants to the U.N. Security Council. Unusually, for a U.N. document, it names names, concluding with a list of offenders. Very unusually for the United Nations, which is rarely involved in internal conflicts, it lists both governments and insurgent rebel groups that exploit children. Among them are the Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka, the Janjaweed of Sudan, the Communist party of Nepal, as well as both irregular rebel forces and government forces in Uganda, Burma and Congo. Mr. Otunnu proposes specific actions, mostly involving careful, continued monitoring of these conflicts by existing regional and U.N. authorities. Already, he says, his list has generated a reaction from groups that 10 years ago might have ignored international criticisms. Because they rely on international connections for weapons, supplies and support, and because many hope to take power, they appear more sensitive to U.N. criticism than might have been expected. This is "more than just words," he says. "This is concrete, tangible."
(More ... Children in Combat (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 19:43 0 comments
Senate Confirms Bush Judicial Nominee Crotty (Reuters.com)
By Thomas Ferraro
Monday, April 11, 2005
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Paul Crotty, an attorney who has worked with top Democrats and Republicans, on Monday became the first of President Bush's 20 renominated judicial nominees to win Senate confirmation.
On a bipartisan vote of 95-0, the Republican-led Senate approved Crotty for a seat on the U.S. district court in the state of New York.
At the same time, Senate Democrats called on Bush to work with them to settle a battle over other judicial nominees that threatens to slow down the work of the Senate.
"Let us work together to find consensus judicial candidates," Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, and Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, wrote in a letter to Bush.
Bush has sought Senate confirmation votes on all of his judicial nominees, including ones that Democrats have cast as unacceptable "right-wing extremists."
(More ... Politics News Article | Reuters.com) ¶ 19:31 0 comments
Monday, April 11, 2005
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Paul Crotty, an attorney who has worked with top Democrats and Republicans, on Monday became the first of President Bush's 20 renominated judicial nominees to win Senate confirmation.
On a bipartisan vote of 95-0, the Republican-led Senate approved Crotty for a seat on the U.S. district court in the state of New York.
At the same time, Senate Democrats called on Bush to work with them to settle a battle over other judicial nominees that threatens to slow down the work of the Senate.
"Let us work together to find consensus judicial candidates," Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, and Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, wrote in a letter to Bush.
Bush has sought Senate confirmation votes on all of his judicial nominees, including ones that Democrats have cast as unacceptable "right-wing extremists."
(More ... Politics News Article | Reuters.com) ¶ 19:31 0 comments
Kerry Says Trickery Foiled Many Voters (NYTimes.com)
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: April 11, 2005
BOSTON, April 10 (AP) - Many voters in last year's election were denied access to the polls through trickery and intimidation, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts told a voters' group on Sunday.
"Last year, too many people were denied their right to vote; too many who tried to vote were intimidated," Mr. Kerry said at an event sponsored by the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts.
He cited examples of trickery. "Leaflets are handed out saying Democrats vote on Wednesday, Republicans vote on Tuesday," Mr. Kerry said. "People are told in telephone calls that if you've ever had a parking ticket, you're not allowed to vote."
(More ... The New York Times > Washington > Kerry Says Trickery Foiled Many Voters) ¶ 08:06 0 comments
Published: April 11, 2005
BOSTON, April 10 (AP) - Many voters in last year's election were denied access to the polls through trickery and intimidation, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts told a voters' group on Sunday.
"Last year, too many people were denied their right to vote; too many who tried to vote were intimidated," Mr. Kerry said at an event sponsored by the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts.
He cited examples of trickery. "Leaflets are handed out saying Democrats vote on Wednesday, Republicans vote on Tuesday," Mr. Kerry said. "People are told in telephone calls that if you've ever had a parking ticket, you're not allowed to vote."
(More ... The New York Times > Washington > Kerry Says Trickery Foiled Many Voters) ¶ 08:06 0 comments
Revising the Patriot Act to Restore American Liberties (IHT.com)
EDITORIAL
Monday, April 11, 2005
The New York Times
When Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who is not exactly a renowned civil libertarian, says the Patriot Act may need some adjustments, it clearly has serious problems. The act, which was rushed through Congress after the Sept. 11 attacks, gives the U.S. government too much power to invade the privacy of ordinary Americans and otherwise trample on their rights. Congress, which is now reviewing the act, should rewrite the parts that violate civil liberties. But it is important to realize that most of the worst post-Sept. 11 abuses did not stem from the Patriot Act. If Congress wants to restore the civil liberties Americans have lost in the last three and a half years, it must also look more broadly at the problems that have emerged from the war on terror.
After Sept. 11, Congress was in such a rush to pass the Patriot Act that, disturbingly, many members did not even read it before they voted for it. Fortunately, Congress made some of the most controversial provisions expire by the end of 2005. Last week, it began a series of hearings on the act, focusing on the parts that need to be reauthorized.
(More ... Revising the Patriot Act to restore American liberties) ¶ 08:02 0 comments
Monday, April 11, 2005
The New York Times
When Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who is not exactly a renowned civil libertarian, says the Patriot Act may need some adjustments, it clearly has serious problems. The act, which was rushed through Congress after the Sept. 11 attacks, gives the U.S. government too much power to invade the privacy of ordinary Americans and otherwise trample on their rights. Congress, which is now reviewing the act, should rewrite the parts that violate civil liberties. But it is important to realize that most of the worst post-Sept. 11 abuses did not stem from the Patriot Act. If Congress wants to restore the civil liberties Americans have lost in the last three and a half years, it must also look more broadly at the problems that have emerged from the war on terror.
After Sept. 11, Congress was in such a rush to pass the Patriot Act that, disturbingly, many members did not even read it before they voted for it. Fortunately, Congress made some of the most controversial provisions expire by the end of 2005. Last week, it began a series of hearings on the act, focusing on the parts that need to be reauthorized.
(More ... Revising the Patriot Act to restore American liberties) ¶ 08:02 0 comments
Clinton Says He'll Give $10M to AIDS Fight (CNN.com)
Donation will buy drugs for children in developing countries
Monday, April 11, 2005 Posted: 12:34 PM EDT (1634 GMT)
NEW YORK (CNN) -- Former President Bill Clinton announced Monday that his foundation will donate $10 million to expand treatment for children with AIDS in the developing world.
The new initiative will deliver AIDS drugs, known as antiretroviral treatment, or ART, and technical assistance for an estimated 10,000 children in at least 10 nations by the end of the year.
The pediatric AIDS medication will be made available at half the normal cost, with the help of India-based drug company Cipla.
The foundation's initiative makes AIDS drugs available for as little as $140 a year, so "treatment and care is now available and more affordable in the developing world," Clinton said.
The initiative will concentrate on rural areas and will double the number of HIV-infected children being treated in developing countries besides Thailand and Brazil, Clinton said.
(More ... CNN.com - Clinton says he'll give $10M to AIDS fight - Apr 11, 2005) ¶ 07:59 0 comments
Monday, April 11, 2005 Posted: 12:34 PM EDT (1634 GMT)
NEW YORK (CNN) -- Former President Bill Clinton announced Monday that his foundation will donate $10 million to expand treatment for children with AIDS in the developing world.
The new initiative will deliver AIDS drugs, known as antiretroviral treatment, or ART, and technical assistance for an estimated 10,000 children in at least 10 nations by the end of the year.
The pediatric AIDS medication will be made available at half the normal cost, with the help of India-based drug company Cipla.
The foundation's initiative makes AIDS drugs available for as little as $140 a year, so "treatment and care is now available and more affordable in the developing world," Clinton said.
The initiative will concentrate on rural areas and will double the number of HIV-infected children being treated in developing countries besides Thailand and Brazil, Clinton said.
(More ... CNN.com - Clinton says he'll give $10M to AIDS fight - Apr 11, 2005) ¶ 07:59 0 comments
4.09.2005
Public Dissatisfaction With Bush, Congress Grows (USATODAY.com)
Posted 4/8/2005 5:55 PM
WASHINGTON (AP) — The public's dissatisfaction with President Bush and the Republican-led Congress is growing, with ratings dropping amid record high gas prices, war in Iraq, the Social Security debate and the emotional Terri Schiavo case.
President Bush claimed indifference about his falling ratings in some polls.
Charles Dharapak, AP
The Republican president's job approval is at 44%, with 54% disapproving. Only 37% have a favorable opinion of the work being done by Congress, according to an AP-Ipsos poll.
Bush's job approval was at 49% in January, the same month in which he was sworn in for a second term, while Congress' was at 41%.
The president was asked Friday about his falling ratings in some polls, and he claimed indifference.
(More ... USATODAY.com - Public dissatisfaction with Bush, Congress grows) ¶ 20:33 0 comments
WASHINGTON (AP) — The public's dissatisfaction with President Bush and the Republican-led Congress is growing, with ratings dropping amid record high gas prices, war in Iraq, the Social Security debate and the emotional Terri Schiavo case.
President Bush claimed indifference about his falling ratings in some polls.
Charles Dharapak, AP
The Republican president's job approval is at 44%, with 54% disapproving. Only 37% have a favorable opinion of the work being done by Congress, according to an AP-Ipsos poll.
Bush's job approval was at 49% in January, the same month in which he was sworn in for a second term, while Congress' was at 41%.
The president was asked Friday about his falling ratings in some polls, and he claimed indifference.
(More ... USATODAY.com - Public dissatisfaction with Bush, Congress grows) ¶ 20:33 0 comments
Killing Off Housing for the Poor (NYTimes.com)
EDITORIAL
Published: April 9, 2005
The Bush administration pays lip service to the goal of "ending chronic homelessness" - while undermining the very programs that keep poor people from ending up in the streets. The Housing and Urban Development Department is proposing unreasonable cuts in federal subsidies, which would make it harder for underfinanced housing authorities to keep their developments livable and safe. And a proposal in Congress would make it harder for the poor to get rental subsidies from Section 8, the public-private partnership that underwrites rents for nearly two million of the country's low-income families and encourages builders to develop affordable housing.
This meat-ax approach has to stop. Congress needs to understand that poor people won't just disappear when the housing that serves them dries up.
(More ... The New York Times > Opinion > Editorial: Killing Off Housing for the Poor) ¶ 20:28 0 comments
Published: April 9, 2005
The Bush administration pays lip service to the goal of "ending chronic homelessness" - while undermining the very programs that keep poor people from ending up in the streets. The Housing and Urban Development Department is proposing unreasonable cuts in federal subsidies, which would make it harder for underfinanced housing authorities to keep their developments livable and safe. And a proposal in Congress would make it harder for the poor to get rental subsidies from Section 8, the public-private partnership that underwrites rents for nearly two million of the country's low-income families and encourages builders to develop affordable housing.
This meat-ax approach has to stop. Congress needs to understand that poor people won't just disappear when the housing that serves them dries up.
(More ... The New York Times > Opinion > Editorial: Killing Off Housing for the Poor) ¶ 20:28 0 comments
How to Hurt American Business (NYTimes.com)
EDITORIAL
Published: April 9, 2005
So much for the cheap dollar's help for United States exports. Beginning May 1, American companies that sell paper, textiles, machinery and farm produce to Europe are due to be slapped with punitive tariffs of 15 percent. Companies that sell oysters, live swine and certain types of fish to Canada will also be hit. Ditto for those selling certain products to Brazil, Chile, India, South Korea and Mexico.
Altogether, the tariffs will cost American exporters up to $150 million this year, but that's just the beginning. That number could multiply by leaps and bounds next year, unless Congress backs off its quest to tilt the global playing field in favor of politically powerful domestic steel companies.
So why is this happening? Back in 2000, Congress allowed a fiery protectionist, Senator Robert Byrd, to push through a bill that handed the tariffs that the government imposes on foreign competitors for supposed "dumping" infractions over to the American companies that filed the complaints. The money used to go to the Treasury.
(More ... The New York Times > Opinion > Editorial: How to Hurt American Business) ¶ 20:26 0 comments
Published: April 9, 2005
So much for the cheap dollar's help for United States exports. Beginning May 1, American companies that sell paper, textiles, machinery and farm produce to Europe are due to be slapped with punitive tariffs of 15 percent. Companies that sell oysters, live swine and certain types of fish to Canada will also be hit. Ditto for those selling certain products to Brazil, Chile, India, South Korea and Mexico.
Altogether, the tariffs will cost American exporters up to $150 million this year, but that's just the beginning. That number could multiply by leaps and bounds next year, unless Congress backs off its quest to tilt the global playing field in favor of politically powerful domestic steel companies.
So why is this happening? Back in 2000, Congress allowed a fiery protectionist, Senator Robert Byrd, to push through a bill that handed the tariffs that the government imposes on foreign competitors for supposed "dumping" infractions over to the American companies that filed the complaints. The money used to go to the Treasury.
(More ... The New York Times > Opinion > Editorial: How to Hurt American Business) ¶ 20:26 0 comments
Bush's Worst Nominees (IHT.com)
EDITORIAL
The New York Times
Saturday, April 9, 2005
When a U.S. president picks his administration officials, the opposing political party can't expect to be thrilled with the selections. Right now, Democrats in the Senate are trying to block the nominations of three men chosen by George W. Bush for important posts: John Bolton for UN ambassador, Stephen Johnson for head of the Environmental Protection Agency, and Lester Crawford for commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration. They have excellent reasons for opposition in each case, but some reasons are more excellent than others.
(More ... Bush's worst nominees) ¶ 20:22 0 comments
The New York Times
Saturday, April 9, 2005
When a U.S. president picks his administration officials, the opposing political party can't expect to be thrilled with the selections. Right now, Democrats in the Senate are trying to block the nominations of three men chosen by George W. Bush for important posts: John Bolton for UN ambassador, Stephen Johnson for head of the Environmental Protection Agency, and Lester Crawford for commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration. They have excellent reasons for opposition in each case, but some reasons are more excellent than others.
(More ... Bush's worst nominees) ¶ 20:22 0 comments
Connecticut Senate Approves Civil Unions Bill (CNN.com)
Thursday, April 7, 2005 Posted: 11:37 AM EDT (1537 GMT)
HARTFORD, Connecticut (AP) -- The state Senate easily approved a bill that would make Connecticut the first state to recognize civil unions between same-sex couples without being pressured by the courts.
Senators debated for nearly four hours Wednesday before voting 27-9 for the landmark bill, which would give gay and lesbian couples many of the same rights as married couples. Vermont has approved civil unions and Massachusetts has gay marriage, but the changes came only after lawsuits were brought by same-sex couples.
"We stand today before a portal to history," said Democratic Sen. Andrew McDonald, one of a handful of openly gay lawmakers. "I ask you to pass through it."
Proponents say the legislation will likely clear the state House, possibly as early as next week. Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell has not taken a stand on the bill but has said she supports the concept of civil unions.
A poll released Thursday found that Connecticut voters back civil unions but not gay marriage.
(More ... CNN.com - Connecticut Senate approves civil unions bill - Apr 7, 2005) ¶ 20:18 0 comments
HARTFORD, Connecticut (AP) -- The state Senate easily approved a bill that would make Connecticut the first state to recognize civil unions between same-sex couples without being pressured by the courts.
Senators debated for nearly four hours Wednesday before voting 27-9 for the landmark bill, which would give gay and lesbian couples many of the same rights as married couples. Vermont has approved civil unions and Massachusetts has gay marriage, but the changes came only after lawsuits were brought by same-sex couples.
"We stand today before a portal to history," said Democratic Sen. Andrew McDonald, one of a handful of openly gay lawmakers. "I ask you to pass through it."
Proponents say the legislation will likely clear the state House, possibly as early as next week. Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell has not taken a stand on the bill but has said she supports the concept of civil unions.
A poll released Thursday found that Connecticut voters back civil unions but not gay marriage.
(More ... CNN.com - Connecticut Senate approves civil unions bill - Apr 7, 2005) ¶ 20:18 0 comments
US Justice Judged (TheAge.com.au)
April 9, 2005 - 4:53PM
In a development the Bush administration had hoped to avoid, the stories of about 60 detainees imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base have spilled out in court papers.
A US college-educated detainee asks plaintively in one: "Is it possible to see the evidence in order to refute it?"
In another transcript, the unidentified president of a US military tribunal bursts out: "I don't care about international law. I don't want to hear the words 'international law' again. We are not concerned with international law."
Expressing defiance in some instances and stoic acceptance of their fate in others, the once nameless and still largely faceless detainees appeared last year before tribunals that, after quick reviews, declared they were unlawful enemy combatants who could be held indefinitely.
The US government is holding about 550 terrorism suspects at the Navy base in Cuba. An additional 214 have been released since the prison opened in January 2002 - some into the custody of their home governments, others freed outright.
Little information about them has been released through official channels. But the stories of 60 or more are spelled out in detail in thousands of pages of transcripts filed in US District Court in Washington, where lawsuits challenging their detentions have been filed.
(More ... US justice judged - War on Terror - www.theage.com.au) ¶ 20:12 0 comments
In a development the Bush administration had hoped to avoid, the stories of about 60 detainees imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base have spilled out in court papers.
A US college-educated detainee asks plaintively in one: "Is it possible to see the evidence in order to refute it?"
In another transcript, the unidentified president of a US military tribunal bursts out: "I don't care about international law. I don't want to hear the words 'international law' again. We are not concerned with international law."
Expressing defiance in some instances and stoic acceptance of their fate in others, the once nameless and still largely faceless detainees appeared last year before tribunals that, after quick reviews, declared they were unlawful enemy combatants who could be held indefinitely.
The US government is holding about 550 terrorism suspects at the Navy base in Cuba. An additional 214 have been released since the prison opened in January 2002 - some into the custody of their home governments, others freed outright.
Little information about them has been released through official channels. But the stories of 60 or more are spelled out in detail in thousands of pages of transcripts filed in US District Court in Washington, where lawsuits challenging their detentions have been filed.
(More ... US justice judged - War on Terror - www.theage.com.au) ¶ 20:12 0 comments
And the Verdict on Justice Kennedy Is: Guilty (WashingtonPost.com)
By Dana Milbank
Saturday, April 9, 2005; Page A03
Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy is a fairly accomplished jurist, but he might want to get himself a good lawyer -- and perhaps a few more bodyguards.
Conservative leaders meeting in Washington yesterday for a discussion of "Remedies to Judicial Tyranny" decided that Kennedy, a Ronald Reagan appointee, should be impeached, or worse.
Phyllis Schlafly, doyenne of American conservatism, said Kennedy's opinion forbidding capital punishment for juveniles "is a good ground of impeachment." To cheers and applause from those gathered at a downtown Marriott for a conference on "Confronting the Judicial War on Faith," Schlafly said that Kennedy had not met the "good behavior" requirement for office and that "Congress ought to talk about impeachment."
Next, Michael P. Farris, chairman of the Home School Legal Defense Association, said Kennedy "should be the poster boy for impeachment" for citing international norms in his opinions. "If our congressmen and senators do not have the courage to impeach and remove from office Justice Kennedy, they ought to be impeached as well."
Not to be outdone, lawyer-author Edwin Vieira told the gathering that Kennedy should be impeached because his philosophy, evidenced in his opinion striking down an anti-sodomy statute, "upholds Marxist, Leninist, satanic principles drawn from foreign law."
(More ... And the Verdict on Justice Kennedy Is: Guilty (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 19:58 0 comments
Saturday, April 9, 2005; Page A03
Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy is a fairly accomplished jurist, but he might want to get himself a good lawyer -- and perhaps a few more bodyguards.
Conservative leaders meeting in Washington yesterday for a discussion of "Remedies to Judicial Tyranny" decided that Kennedy, a Ronald Reagan appointee, should be impeached, or worse.
Phyllis Schlafly, doyenne of American conservatism, said Kennedy's opinion forbidding capital punishment for juveniles "is a good ground of impeachment." To cheers and applause from those gathered at a downtown Marriott for a conference on "Confronting the Judicial War on Faith," Schlafly said that Kennedy had not met the "good behavior" requirement for office and that "Congress ought to talk about impeachment."
Next, Michael P. Farris, chairman of the Home School Legal Defense Association, said Kennedy "should be the poster boy for impeachment" for citing international norms in his opinions. "If our congressmen and senators do not have the courage to impeach and remove from office Justice Kennedy, they ought to be impeached as well."
Not to be outdone, lawyer-author Edwin Vieira told the gathering that Kennedy should be impeached because his philosophy, evidenced in his opinion striking down an anti-sodomy statute, "upholds Marxist, Leninist, satanic principles drawn from foreign law."
(More ... And the Verdict on Justice Kennedy Is: Guilty (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 19:58 0 comments
Buck Doesn't Stop at This President's Desk (SeattlePI.nwsource.com)
By HELEN THOMAS
HEARST NEWSPAPERS
WASHINGTON -- White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan says President Bush was "pleased" with the latest investigation that blames CIA analysts for the false information that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.
That's the reason Bush invaded Iraq, remember? Once again it's those low-level bureaucrats who took us into war. And once again a panel of "don't rock the boat" establishment figures has let the commander in chief off the hook.
I asked McClellan if the president was upset to be so misguided and at such a human cost. Well, you had to be there.
He danced around on the subject, talked about "a culture in the intelligence community that had not adapted to meet the threats that we face today." But he could not be pinned down on how the president personally felt about making war on the basis of bum information.
Any other president would have blown his stack. Instead, Bush honored former CIA Director George Tenet with the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
The commission assigned to inquire into the intelligence failures was headed by Laurence Silberman, a conservative Republican and retired member of the D.C. U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, with former Democratic Sen. Charles Robb as co-chairman.
(More ... Buck doesn't stop at this president's desk) ¶ 19:55 0 comments
HEARST NEWSPAPERS
WASHINGTON -- White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan says President Bush was "pleased" with the latest investigation that blames CIA analysts for the false information that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.
That's the reason Bush invaded Iraq, remember? Once again it's those low-level bureaucrats who took us into war. And once again a panel of "don't rock the boat" establishment figures has let the commander in chief off the hook.
I asked McClellan if the president was upset to be so misguided and at such a human cost. Well, you had to be there.
He danced around on the subject, talked about "a culture in the intelligence community that had not adapted to meet the threats that we face today." But he could not be pinned down on how the president personally felt about making war on the basis of bum information.
Any other president would have blown his stack. Instead, Bush honored former CIA Director George Tenet with the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
The commission assigned to inquire into the intelligence failures was headed by Laurence Silberman, a conservative Republican and retired member of the D.C. U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, with former Democratic Sen. Charles Robb as co-chairman.
(More ... Buck doesn't stop at this president's desk) ¶ 19:55 0 comments
4.07.2005
Counsel to GOP Senator Wrote Memo On Schiavo (WashingtonPost.com)
Martinez Aide Who Cited Upside For Party Resigns
By Mike Allen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, April 7, 2005; Page A01
The legal counsel to Sen. Mel Martinez (R-Fla.) admitted yesterday that he was the author of a memo citing the political advantage to Republicans of intervening in the case of Terri Schiavo, the senator said in an interview last night.
Brian H. Darling, 39, a former lobbyist for the Alexander Strategy Group on gun rights and other issues, offered his resignation and it was immediately accepted, Martinez said.
Martinez, the GOP's Senate point man on the issue, said he earlier had been assured by aides that his office had nothing to do with producing the memo. "I never did an investigation, as such," he said. "I just took it for granted that we wouldn't be that stupid. It was never my intention to in any way politicize this issue."
Martinez, a freshman who was secretary of housing and urban development for most of President Bush's first term, said he had not read the one-page memo. He said he inadvertently passed it to Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), who had worked with him on the issue. After that, officials gave the memo to reporters for ABC News and The Washington Post.
(More ... Counsel to GOP Senator Wrote Memo On Schiavo (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 20:32 0 comments
By Mike Allen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, April 7, 2005; Page A01
The legal counsel to Sen. Mel Martinez (R-Fla.) admitted yesterday that he was the author of a memo citing the political advantage to Republicans of intervening in the case of Terri Schiavo, the senator said in an interview last night.
Brian H. Darling, 39, a former lobbyist for the Alexander Strategy Group on gun rights and other issues, offered his resignation and it was immediately accepted, Martinez said.
Martinez, the GOP's Senate point man on the issue, said he earlier had been assured by aides that his office had nothing to do with producing the memo. "I never did an investigation, as such," he said. "I just took it for granted that we wouldn't be that stupid. It was never my intention to in any way politicize this issue."
Martinez, a freshman who was secretary of housing and urban development for most of President Bush's first term, said he had not read the one-page memo. He said he inadvertently passed it to Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), who had worked with him on the issue. After that, officials gave the memo to reporters for ABC News and The Washington Post.
(More ... Counsel to GOP Senator Wrote Memo On Schiavo (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 20:32 0 comments
The Judges Made Them Do It (IHT.com)
EDITORIAL
April 7, 2005
The New York Times
It was appalling when the House majority leader threatened political retribution against judges who did not toe his extremist political line. But when a second important Republican stands up and excuses murderous violence against judges as an understandable reaction to their decisions, then it is time to get really scared.
It happened Monday, in a moment that was horrifying even by the rock-bottom standards of the campaign that Republican zealots are conducting against America's judiciary. Senator John Cornyn, a Texas Republican, rose in the chamber and dared to argue that recent courthouse violence might be explained by distress about judges who "are making political decisions yet are unaccountable to the public." The frustration "builds up and builds up to the point where some people engage in" violence, said Cornyn, a former member of the Texas Supreme Court who is on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which supposedly protects the Constitution and its guarantee of an independent judiciary.
Listeners could only cringe at the events behind Cornyn's fulminating: An Atlanta judge was murdered in his courtroom by a career criminal who wanted only to shoot his way out of a trial, and a Chicago judge's mother and husband were executed by a deranged man who was furious that she had dismissed a wild lawsuit. It was sickening that an elected official would publicly offer these sociopaths as examples of any democratic value, let alone as holders of legitimate concerns about the judiciary.
The need to shield judges from outside threats - including those from elected officials like Cornyn - is a priceless principle of American democracy. Cornyn offered a smarmy proclamation of "great distress" at courthouse thuggery. Then he rationalized it with broadside accusations that judges "make raw political or ideological decisions." He thumbed his nose at the separation of powers, suggesting that the Supreme Court be "an enforcer of political decisions made by elected representatives of the people." Avoiding that nightmare is precisely why the founders made federal judgeships lifetime jobs and created a nomination process that requires presidents to seek bipartisan support.
(More ... The judges made them do it) ¶ 20:16 0 comments
April 7, 2005
The New York Times
It was appalling when the House majority leader threatened political retribution against judges who did not toe his extremist political line. But when a second important Republican stands up and excuses murderous violence against judges as an understandable reaction to their decisions, then it is time to get really scared.
It happened Monday, in a moment that was horrifying even by the rock-bottom standards of the campaign that Republican zealots are conducting against America's judiciary. Senator John Cornyn, a Texas Republican, rose in the chamber and dared to argue that recent courthouse violence might be explained by distress about judges who "are making political decisions yet are unaccountable to the public." The frustration "builds up and builds up to the point where some people engage in" violence, said Cornyn, a former member of the Texas Supreme Court who is on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which supposedly protects the Constitution and its guarantee of an independent judiciary.
Listeners could only cringe at the events behind Cornyn's fulminating: An Atlanta judge was murdered in his courtroom by a career criminal who wanted only to shoot his way out of a trial, and a Chicago judge's mother and husband were executed by a deranged man who was furious that she had dismissed a wild lawsuit. It was sickening that an elected official would publicly offer these sociopaths as examples of any democratic value, let alone as holders of legitimate concerns about the judiciary.
The need to shield judges from outside threats - including those from elected officials like Cornyn - is a priceless principle of American democracy. Cornyn offered a smarmy proclamation of "great distress" at courthouse thuggery. Then he rationalized it with broadside accusations that judges "make raw political or ideological decisions." He thumbed his nose at the separation of powers, suggesting that the Supreme Court be "an enforcer of political decisions made by elected representatives of the people." Avoiding that nightmare is precisely why the founders made federal judgeships lifetime jobs and created a nomination process that requires presidents to seek bipartisan support.
(More ... The judges made them do it) ¶ 20:16 0 comments
Democrats Block Nomination Over Morning-After Pill (NYTimes.com)
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
Published: April 7, 2005
WASHINGTON, April 6 - President Bush's nominee to lead the Food and Drug Administration is being blocked from Senate confirmation by two Democrats who said Wednesday that they would hold up a vote until the agency settled the long-delayed question of whether an emergency contraceptive could be sold over the counter.
The Democrats, Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Patty Murray of Washington, met with the nominee, Dr. Lester M. Crawford, on Wednesday to discuss what they regard as foot-dragging on the issue of the so-called morning-after pill. An expert panel of scientists recommended over-the-counter sales in December 2003, but the agency has yet to issue a final ruling.
"I'm prepared to hold it for as long as it takes to get a decision made," Mrs. Clinton said. She added, "From everything we're able to determine, the agency has substituted politics and ideology for science and facts."
Dr. Crawford could not be reached, and an agency spokeswoman, Kathleen Quinn, said the F.D.A. would have no comment. But at a hearing last month, Dr. Crawford told senators the decision on the contraceptive "will not be based on politics." He did not say then when a final decision would be made and, Ms. Murray said, did not do so on Wednesday.
"It was very frustrating and very unsatisfactory," she said, adding, "I did not get any timeline at all for a decision, and there was no new information."
The hold complicates the future of the food and drug agency at a time when it is already being criticized for its handling of several drug safety scandals.
(More ... The New York Times > Washington > Democrats Block Nomination Over Morning-After Pill) ¶ 20:14 0 comments
Published: April 7, 2005
WASHINGTON, April 6 - President Bush's nominee to lead the Food and Drug Administration is being blocked from Senate confirmation by two Democrats who said Wednesday that they would hold up a vote until the agency settled the long-delayed question of whether an emergency contraceptive could be sold over the counter.
The Democrats, Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Patty Murray of Washington, met with the nominee, Dr. Lester M. Crawford, on Wednesday to discuss what they regard as foot-dragging on the issue of the so-called morning-after pill. An expert panel of scientists recommended over-the-counter sales in December 2003, but the agency has yet to issue a final ruling.
"I'm prepared to hold it for as long as it takes to get a decision made," Mrs. Clinton said. She added, "From everything we're able to determine, the agency has substituted politics and ideology for science and facts."
Dr. Crawford could not be reached, and an agency spokeswoman, Kathleen Quinn, said the F.D.A. would have no comment. But at a hearing last month, Dr. Crawford told senators the decision on the contraceptive "will not be based on politics." He did not say then when a final decision would be made and, Ms. Murray said, did not do so on Wednesday.
"It was very frustrating and very unsatisfactory," she said, adding, "I did not get any timeline at all for a decision, and there was no new information."
The hold complicates the future of the food and drug agency at a time when it is already being criticized for its handling of several drug safety scandals.
(More ... The New York Times > Washington > Democrats Block Nomination Over Morning-After Pill) ¶ 20:14 0 comments
DeLay Blasts Media Over Report of Payments to Family (CNN.com)
From Ted Barrett
CNN Washington Bureau
Wednesday, April 6, 2005 Posted: 8:17 PM EDT (0017 GMT)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- House Majority Leader Tom DeLay defended his family Wednesday, saying newspaper articles about his wife and daughter and about his trip to Russia were "seedy" efforts by the "liberal media" to humiliate him.
The New York Times reported Wednesday that DeLay's wife and daughter have been paid more than $500,000 since 2001 by DeLay's political action and campaign committees, according to a detailed review of disclosure statements filed with the Federal Election Commission and separate fund-raising records in Texas.
The newspaper reports were the latest political controversies for DeLay. He has been admonished three times by the House Ethics Committee, and he faces possible indictment in Texas in connection with a campaign finance probe.
The Times said the payments to DeLay's wife, Christine DeLay, and his only child, Dani DeLay Ferro, were described in the disclosure forms as "fund-raising fees," "campaign management" or "payroll," with no additional details about how they earned the money.
(More ... CNN.com - DeLay blasts media over report of payments to family - Apr 6, 2005) ¶ 20:09 0 comments
CNN Washington Bureau
Wednesday, April 6, 2005 Posted: 8:17 PM EDT (0017 GMT)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- House Majority Leader Tom DeLay defended his family Wednesday, saying newspaper articles about his wife and daughter and about his trip to Russia were "seedy" efforts by the "liberal media" to humiliate him.
The New York Times reported Wednesday that DeLay's wife and daughter have been paid more than $500,000 since 2001 by DeLay's political action and campaign committees, according to a detailed review of disclosure statements filed with the Federal Election Commission and separate fund-raising records in Texas.
The newspaper reports were the latest political controversies for DeLay. He has been admonished three times by the House Ethics Committee, and he faces possible indictment in Texas in connection with a campaign finance probe.
The Times said the payments to DeLay's wife, Christine DeLay, and his only child, Dani DeLay Ferro, were described in the disclosure forms as "fund-raising fees," "campaign management" or "payroll," with no additional details about how they earned the money.
(More ... CNN.com - DeLay blasts media over report of payments to family - Apr 6, 2005) ¶ 20:09 0 comments
4.06.2005
Gonzales, Mueller Pitch Patriot Act Renewal (WashingtonPost.com)
Top Law Enforcement Officials Say Law Needs Only Minor Revisions
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, April 5, 2005; 3:42 PM
The nation's two top law enforcement officials urged Congress today to renew nearly every facet of the sweeping USA Patriot Act antiterrorism legislation, arguing that the controversial law needs only minor tweaking to address the concerns of critics on both sides of the political aisle.
Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III said in testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee that the efforts of the FBI and federal prosecutors to track and stop al Qaeda operatives would be severely hampered if more than a dozen provisions in the law are not renewed by Congress later this year.
"Thanks in part to the act, we have dismantled terrorist cells, disrupted terrorist plots and captured terrorists before they could strike," Gonzales told the committee. He said that "al Qaeda and other terrorist groups still pose a grave threat to the security of the American people, and now is not the time to relinquish some of our most effective tools in this fight."
In a departure from the hard-line position of his predecessor, John D. Ashcroft, Gonzales said he was "open to suggestions" about changes to the law, and he even endorsed small modifications to one provision governing business records that has been a focus of criticism.
Yet he and Mueller made clear that they believe most of the law should be made permanent.
(More ... Gonzales, Mueller Pitch Patriot Act Renewal (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 08:22 0 comments
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, April 5, 2005; 3:42 PM
The nation's two top law enforcement officials urged Congress today to renew nearly every facet of the sweeping USA Patriot Act antiterrorism legislation, arguing that the controversial law needs only minor tweaking to address the concerns of critics on both sides of the political aisle.
Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III said in testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee that the efforts of the FBI and federal prosecutors to track and stop al Qaeda operatives would be severely hampered if more than a dozen provisions in the law are not renewed by Congress later this year.
"Thanks in part to the act, we have dismantled terrorist cells, disrupted terrorist plots and captured terrorists before they could strike," Gonzales told the committee. He said that "al Qaeda and other terrorist groups still pose a grave threat to the security of the American people, and now is not the time to relinquish some of our most effective tools in this fight."
In a departure from the hard-line position of his predecessor, John D. Ashcroft, Gonzales said he was "open to suggestions" about changes to the law, and he even endorsed small modifications to one provision governing business records that has been a focus of criticism.
Yet he and Mueller made clear that they believe most of the law should be made permanent.
(More ... Gonzales, Mueller Pitch Patriot Act Renewal (washingtonpost.com)) ¶ 08:22 0 comments
