Democrats Abroad New Zealand
8.28.2006
Rumsfeld Eyes ICBMs in Terror War (Reuters.com)
By Kristin Roberts
FAIRBANKS, Alaska (Reuters) - U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on Sunday warned North Korea may pose a threat as a weapons seller to terrorists and that America would consider taking the nuclear warheads off intercontinental ballistic missiles so they could be used against terrorists.
Rumsfeld, in Alaska to visit a missile defense installation weeks after Pyongyang test-fired a long-range missile believed capable of reaching the United States, said North Korea is testing missiles to show the capabilities to potential buyers.
"They sell anything to anyone," he said.
"They sell our currency that they counterfeit. They're selling illegal drugs. They're selling basic missile technologies. There's not much they have that they wouldn't sell either to another country or possibly to a terrorist network."
In fact, Rumsfeld said North Korea is more a danger as a proliferator than a military force to challenge South Korea.
(More ... Rumsfeld eyes ICBMs in terror war | Top News | Reuters.com) ¶ 20:57 0 comments
FAIRBANKS, Alaska (Reuters) - U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on Sunday warned North Korea may pose a threat as a weapons seller to terrorists and that America would consider taking the nuclear warheads off intercontinental ballistic missiles so they could be used against terrorists.
Rumsfeld, in Alaska to visit a missile defense installation weeks after Pyongyang test-fired a long-range missile believed capable of reaching the United States, said North Korea is testing missiles to show the capabilities to potential buyers.
"They sell anything to anyone," he said.
"They sell our currency that they counterfeit. They're selling illegal drugs. They're selling basic missile technologies. There's not much they have that they wouldn't sell either to another country or possibly to a terrorist network."
In fact, Rumsfeld said North Korea is more a danger as a proliferator than a military force to challenge South Korea.
(More ... Rumsfeld eyes ICBMs in terror war | Top News | Reuters.com) ¶ 20:57 0 comments
8.27.2006
Tax Farmers, Mercenaries and Viceroys (NYTimes.com)
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: August 21, 2006
Yesterday The New York Times reported that the Internal Revenue Service would outsource collection of unpaid back taxes to private debt collectors, who would receive a share of the proceeds.
It’s an awful idea. Privatizing tax collection will cost far more than hiring additional I.R.S. agents, raise less revenue and pose obvious risks of abuse. But what’s really amazing is the extent to which this plan is a retreat from modern principles of government. I used to say that conservatives want to take us back to the 1920’s, but the Bush administration seemingly wants to go back to the 16th century.
And privatized tax collection is only part of the great march backward.
In the bad old days, government was a haphazard affair. There was no bureaucracy to collect taxes, so the king subcontracted the job to private “tax farmers,” who often engaged in extortion. There was no regular army, so the king hired mercenaries, who tended to wander off and pillage the nearest village. There was no regular system of administration, so the king assigned the task to favored courtiers, who tended to be corrupt, incompetent or both.
Modern governments solved these problems by creating a professional revenue department to collect taxes, a professional officer corps to enforce military discipline, and a professional civil service. But President Bush apparently doesn’t like these innovations, preferring to govern as if he were King Louis XII.
(More ... Tax Farmers, Mercenaries and Viceroys - New York Times) ¶ 14:59 0 comments
Published: August 21, 2006
Yesterday The New York Times reported that the Internal Revenue Service would outsource collection of unpaid back taxes to private debt collectors, who would receive a share of the proceeds.
It’s an awful idea. Privatizing tax collection will cost far more than hiring additional I.R.S. agents, raise less revenue and pose obvious risks of abuse. But what’s really amazing is the extent to which this plan is a retreat from modern principles of government. I used to say that conservatives want to take us back to the 1920’s, but the Bush administration seemingly wants to go back to the 16th century.
And privatized tax collection is only part of the great march backward.
In the bad old days, government was a haphazard affair. There was no bureaucracy to collect taxes, so the king subcontracted the job to private “tax farmers,” who often engaged in extortion. There was no regular army, so the king hired mercenaries, who tended to wander off and pillage the nearest village. There was no regular system of administration, so the king assigned the task to favored courtiers, who tended to be corrupt, incompetent or both.
Modern governments solved these problems by creating a professional revenue department to collect taxes, a professional officer corps to enforce military discipline, and a professional civil service. But President Bush apparently doesn’t like these innovations, preferring to govern as if he were King Louis XII.
(More ... Tax Farmers, Mercenaries and Viceroys - New York Times) ¶ 14:59 0 comments
8.25.2006
Bush's New Iraq Argument: It Could Be Worse (WashingtonPost.com)
By Peter Baker
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, August 24, 2006; Page A01
Of all the words that President Bush used at his news conference this week to defend his policies in Iraq, the one that did not pass his lips was "progress."
For three years, the president tried to reassure Americans that more progress was being made in Iraq than they realized. But with Iraq either in civil war or on the brink of it, Bush dropped the unseen-progress argument in favor of the contention that things could be even worse.
The shifting rhetoric reflected a broader pessimism that has reached into even some of the most optimistic corners of the administration -- a sense that the Iraq venture has taken a dark turn and will not be resolved anytime soon. Bush advisers once believed that if they met certain benchmarks, such as building a constitutional democracy and training a new Iraqi army, the war would be won. Now they believe they have more or less met those goals, yet the war rages on.
While still committed to the venture, officials have privately told friends and associates outside government that they have grown discouraged in recent months. Even the death of al-Qaeda's leader in Iraq proved not to be the turning point they expected, they have told associates, and other developments have been relentlessly dispiriting, with fewer signs of hope.
Bush acknowledged this week that he has been discouraged as well. "Frustrated?" he asked. "Sometimes I'm frustrated. Rarely surprised. Sometimes I'm happy. This is -- but war is not a time of joy. These aren't joyous times. These are challenging times and they're difficult times and they're straining the psyche of our country."
(More ... Bush's New Iraq Argument: It Could Be Worse) ¶ 08:25 0 comments
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, August 24, 2006; Page A01
Of all the words that President Bush used at his news conference this week to defend his policies in Iraq, the one that did not pass his lips was "progress."
For three years, the president tried to reassure Americans that more progress was being made in Iraq than they realized. But with Iraq either in civil war or on the brink of it, Bush dropped the unseen-progress argument in favor of the contention that things could be even worse.
The shifting rhetoric reflected a broader pessimism that has reached into even some of the most optimistic corners of the administration -- a sense that the Iraq venture has taken a dark turn and will not be resolved anytime soon. Bush advisers once believed that if they met certain benchmarks, such as building a constitutional democracy and training a new Iraqi army, the war would be won. Now they believe they have more or less met those goals, yet the war rages on.
While still committed to the venture, officials have privately told friends and associates outside government that they have grown discouraged in recent months. Even the death of al-Qaeda's leader in Iraq proved not to be the turning point they expected, they have told associates, and other developments have been relentlessly dispiriting, with fewer signs of hope.
Bush acknowledged this week that he has been discouraged as well. "Frustrated?" he asked. "Sometimes I'm frustrated. Rarely surprised. Sometimes I'm happy. This is -- but war is not a time of joy. These aren't joyous times. These are challenging times and they're difficult times and they're straining the psyche of our country."
(More ... Bush's New Iraq Argument: It Could Be Worse) ¶ 08:25 0 comments
Kenya 'Beats the Drums' for Sen. Obama (CNN.com)
He'll take public HIV test to counter stigma, visit ancestral village
Thursday, August 24, 2006; Posted: 3:04 p.m. EDT (19:04 GMT)
NAIROBI, Kenya (AP) -- Barack Obama may have only landed Thursday for his latest visit to his father's homeland, but the U.S. senator is already become the country's most prominent "citizen."
People drinking a Kenyan beer called Senator are ordering "Obama" instead. Obama's photograph is popping up on T-shirts, and the once knee-high grass in his ancestral village was cut in advance of his arrival.
As the only African-American in the U.S. Senate, Obama is seen as an inspiration in this east African country where more than half its 33 million people eke out a living on less than $1 a day.
Obama arrived Thursday for a six-day visit, and planned to meet with President Mwai Kibaki and stop at the site where Nairobi's U.S. Embassy was bombed in 1998, killing 248 people.
The Illinois Democrat, his wife, Michelle, and daughters Malia, 8, and Sasha, 4, were greeted at Jomo Kenyatta International Airport in Nairobi by U.S. Ambassador Michael E. Ranneberger, the embassy said.
(More ... CNN.com - Kenya 'beats the drums' for Sen. Obama - Aug 24, 2006) ¶ 08:22 0 comments
Thursday, August 24, 2006; Posted: 3:04 p.m. EDT (19:04 GMT)
NAIROBI, Kenya (AP) -- Barack Obama may have only landed Thursday for his latest visit to his father's homeland, but the U.S. senator is already become the country's most prominent "citizen."
People drinking a Kenyan beer called Senator are ordering "Obama" instead. Obama's photograph is popping up on T-shirts, and the once knee-high grass in his ancestral village was cut in advance of his arrival.
As the only African-American in the U.S. Senate, Obama is seen as an inspiration in this east African country where more than half its 33 million people eke out a living on less than $1 a day.
Obama arrived Thursday for a six-day visit, and planned to meet with President Mwai Kibaki and stop at the site where Nairobi's U.S. Embassy was bombed in 1998, killing 248 people.
The Illinois Democrat, his wife, Michelle, and daughters Malia, 8, and Sasha, 4, were greeted at Jomo Kenyatta International Airport in Nairobi by U.S. Ambassador Michael E. Ranneberger, the embassy said.
(More ... CNN.com - Kenya 'beats the drums' for Sen. Obama - Aug 24, 2006) ¶ 08:22 0 comments
8.18.2006
Wal-Mart a Political Target Ahead of Election (Reuters.com)
By John Whitesides, Political Correspondent
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Giant retailer Wal-Mart has become a political target ahead of November's congressional election, taking fire from Democrats and labor unions for its record on health care, jobs and wages.
A cross-country bus trip drawing support from scores of big-name Democrats is the latest chapter in the year-old "Wake Up Wal-Mart" campaign, which organizers hope will put the labor and business practices of the country's biggest private-sector employer front and center in the 2008 White House race.
"Our goal from the start has been to build public and private pressure on this company and make Wal-Mart a national issue in the 2008 campaign," said WakeUp Wal-Mart spokesman Chris Kofinis.
Critics paint Wal-Mart as a national symbol of corporate irresponsibility, claiming it provides inadequate wages and health care coverage for its 1.3 million employees while shipping new jobs overseas.
"The Wal-Mart issue should be at the center of the debate about what kind of country we will be," Kofinis said. "How is it possible that companies can make this much profit and not do the right thing?"
(More ... Wal-Mart a political target ahead of election | Politics News | Reuters.com) ¶ 20:31 0 comments
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Giant retailer Wal-Mart has become a political target ahead of November's congressional election, taking fire from Democrats and labor unions for its record on health care, jobs and wages.
A cross-country bus trip drawing support from scores of big-name Democrats is the latest chapter in the year-old "Wake Up Wal-Mart" campaign, which organizers hope will put the labor and business practices of the country's biggest private-sector employer front and center in the 2008 White House race.
"Our goal from the start has been to build public and private pressure on this company and make Wal-Mart a national issue in the 2008 campaign," said WakeUp Wal-Mart spokesman Chris Kofinis.
Critics paint Wal-Mart as a national symbol of corporate irresponsibility, claiming it provides inadequate wages and health care coverage for its 1.3 million employees while shipping new jobs overseas.
"The Wal-Mart issue should be at the center of the debate about what kind of country we will be," Kofinis said. "How is it possible that companies can make this much profit and not do the right thing?"
(More ... Wal-Mart a political target ahead of election | Politics News | Reuters.com) ¶ 20:31 0 comments
Republicans Losing The 'Security Moms' (WashingtonPost.com)
By Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, August 18, 2006; Page A01
CLINTONVILLE, Ohio, Aug. 17 -- Married women with children, the "security moms" whose concerns about terrorism made them an essential part of Republican victories in 2002 and 2004, are taking flight from GOP politicians this year in ways that appear likely to provide a major boost for Democrats in the midterm elections, according to polls and interviews.
This critical group of swing voters -- who are an especially significant factor in many of the most competitive suburban districts on which control of Congress will hinge -- is more inclined to vote Democratic than at any point since Sept. 11, 2001, according to data compiled for The Washington Post by the Pew Research Center.
Married mothers said in interviews here that they remain concerned about national security and the ability of Democrats to keep them safe from terrorist strikes. But surveys indicate Republicans are not benefiting from this phenomenon as they have before.
Disaffection with President Bush, the Iraq war, and other concerns such as rising gasoline prices and economic anxiety are proving more powerful in shaping voter attitudes.
The study, which examined the views of married women with children from April through this week, found that they support Democrats for Congress by a 12-point margin, 50 percent to 38 percent. That is nearly a mirror-image reversal from a similar period in 2002, when this group backed Republicans 53 percent to 36 percent. In 2004, exit polls showed, Bush won a second term in part because 56 percent of married women with children supported him.
Here in suburban Columbus, one of the most important arenas in the 2004 campaign, the diffusion of this support is obvious in interviews, and the political implications are unmistakable.
(More ... Republicans Losing The 'Security Moms') ¶ 20:25 0 comments
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, August 18, 2006; Page A01
CLINTONVILLE, Ohio, Aug. 17 -- Married women with children, the "security moms" whose concerns about terrorism made them an essential part of Republican victories in 2002 and 2004, are taking flight from GOP politicians this year in ways that appear likely to provide a major boost for Democrats in the midterm elections, according to polls and interviews.
This critical group of swing voters -- who are an especially significant factor in many of the most competitive suburban districts on which control of Congress will hinge -- is more inclined to vote Democratic than at any point since Sept. 11, 2001, according to data compiled for The Washington Post by the Pew Research Center.
Married mothers said in interviews here that they remain concerned about national security and the ability of Democrats to keep them safe from terrorist strikes. But surveys indicate Republicans are not benefiting from this phenomenon as they have before.
Disaffection with President Bush, the Iraq war, and other concerns such as rising gasoline prices and economic anxiety are proving more powerful in shaping voter attitudes.
The study, which examined the views of married women with children from April through this week, found that they support Democrats for Congress by a 12-point margin, 50 percent to 38 percent. That is nearly a mirror-image reversal from a similar period in 2002, when this group backed Republicans 53 percent to 36 percent. In 2004, exit polls showed, Bush won a second term in part because 56 percent of married women with children supported him.
Here in suburban Columbus, one of the most important arenas in the 2004 campaign, the diffusion of this support is obvious in interviews, and the political implications are unmistakable.
(More ... Republicans Losing The 'Security Moms') ¶ 20:25 0 comments
8.14.2006
Hoping for Fear (NYTimes.com)
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: August 14, 2006
Just two days after 9/11, I learned from Congressional staffers that Republicans on Capitol Hill were already exploiting the atrocity, trying to use it to push through tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy. I wrote about the subject the next day, warning that “politicians who wrap themselves in the flag while relentlessly pursuing their usual partisan agenda are not true patriots.”
The response from readers was furious — fury not at the politicians but at me, for suggesting that such an outrage was even possible. “How can I say that to my young son?” demanded one angry correspondent.
I wonder what he says to his son these days.
We now know that from the very beginning, the Bush administration and its allies in Congress saw the terrorist threat not as a problem to be solved, but as a political opportunity to be exploited. The story of the latest terror plot makes the administration’s fecklessness and cynicism on terrorism clearer than ever.
Fecklessness: the administration has always pinched pennies when it comes to actually defending America against terrorist attacks. Now we learn that terrorism experts have known about the threat of liquid explosives for years, but that the Bush administration did nothing about that threat until now, and tried to divert funds from programs that might have helped protect us. “As the British terror plot was unfolding,” reports The Associated Press, “the Bush administration quietly tried to take away $6 million that was supposed to be spent this year developing new explosives detection technology.”
Cynicism: Republicans have consistently portrayed their opponents as weak on terrorism, if not actually in sympathy with the terrorists. Remember the 2002 TV ad in which Senator Max Cleland of Georgia was pictured with Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein? Now we have Dick Cheney suggesting that voters in the Democratic primary in Connecticut were lending aid and comfort to “Al Qaeda types.” There they go again.
More fecklessness, and maybe more cynicism, too: NBC reports that there was a dispute between the British and the Americans over when to make arrests in the latest plot. Since the alleged plotters weren’t ready to go — they hadn’t purchased airline tickets, and some didn’t even have passports yet — British officials wanted to watch and wait, hoping to gather more evidence. But according to NBC, the Americans insisted on early arrests.
Suspicions that the Bush administration might have had political motives in wanting the arrests made prematurely are fed by memories of events two years ago: the Department of Homeland Security declared a terror alert just after the Democratic National Convention, shifting the spotlight away from John Kerry — and, according to Pakistani intelligence officials, blowing the cover of a mole inside Al Qaeda.
(More ... Hoping for Fear - New York Times) ¶ 22:01 1 comments
Published: August 14, 2006
Just two days after 9/11, I learned from Congressional staffers that Republicans on Capitol Hill were already exploiting the atrocity, trying to use it to push through tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy. I wrote about the subject the next day, warning that “politicians who wrap themselves in the flag while relentlessly pursuing their usual partisan agenda are not true patriots.”
The response from readers was furious — fury not at the politicians but at me, for suggesting that such an outrage was even possible. “How can I say that to my young son?” demanded one angry correspondent.
I wonder what he says to his son these days.
We now know that from the very beginning, the Bush administration and its allies in Congress saw the terrorist threat not as a problem to be solved, but as a political opportunity to be exploited. The story of the latest terror plot makes the administration’s fecklessness and cynicism on terrorism clearer than ever.
Fecklessness: the administration has always pinched pennies when it comes to actually defending America against terrorist attacks. Now we learn that terrorism experts have known about the threat of liquid explosives for years, but that the Bush administration did nothing about that threat until now, and tried to divert funds from programs that might have helped protect us. “As the British terror plot was unfolding,” reports The Associated Press, “the Bush administration quietly tried to take away $6 million that was supposed to be spent this year developing new explosives detection technology.”
Cynicism: Republicans have consistently portrayed their opponents as weak on terrorism, if not actually in sympathy with the terrorists. Remember the 2002 TV ad in which Senator Max Cleland of Georgia was pictured with Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein? Now we have Dick Cheney suggesting that voters in the Democratic primary in Connecticut were lending aid and comfort to “Al Qaeda types.” There they go again.
More fecklessness, and maybe more cynicism, too: NBC reports that there was a dispute between the British and the Americans over when to make arrests in the latest plot. Since the alleged plotters weren’t ready to go — they hadn’t purchased airline tickets, and some didn’t even have passports yet — British officials wanted to watch and wait, hoping to gather more evidence. But according to NBC, the Americans insisted on early arrests.
Suspicions that the Bush administration might have had political motives in wanting the arrests made prematurely are fed by memories of events two years ago: the Department of Homeland Security declared a terror alert just after the Democratic National Convention, shifting the spotlight away from John Kerry — and, according to Pakistani intelligence officials, blowing the cover of a mole inside Al Qaeda.
(More ... Hoping for Fear - New York Times) ¶ 22:01 1 comments
Governors Oppose Federal Control of Guard (WashingtonPost.com)
By Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, August 14, 2006; Page A02
The nation's governors, protesting what they call an unprecedented shift in authority from the states to the federal government, will urge Congress today to block legislation that would allow the president to take control of National Guard forces in the event of a natural disaster or a threat to homeland security.
In a sharply worded letter that will be transmitted to Republican and Democratic leaders in Congress this morning, the governors ask that a House-Senate conference committee remove a provision included in the House-passed version of the National Defense Authorization Act giving the president such authority.
"This provision was drafted without consultation or input from governors and represents an unprecedented shift in authority from governors as commanders and chief of the Guard to the federal government," the governors state in the letter.
As of yesterday, 51 governors, including some from U.S. territories, had signed the letter, a sign of broad bipartisan support that underscores the depth of opposition among state executives to encroachments by Washington on their powers.
The governors discovered the provision two weeks ago, and the effort to have it removed from the defense bill began at last week's National Governors Association summer meeting in Charleston, S.C.
(More ... Governors Oppose Federal Control of Guard) ¶ 21:27 0 comments
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, August 14, 2006; Page A02
The nation's governors, protesting what they call an unprecedented shift in authority from the states to the federal government, will urge Congress today to block legislation that would allow the president to take control of National Guard forces in the event of a natural disaster or a threat to homeland security.
In a sharply worded letter that will be transmitted to Republican and Democratic leaders in Congress this morning, the governors ask that a House-Senate conference committee remove a provision included in the House-passed version of the National Defense Authorization Act giving the president such authority.
"This provision was drafted without consultation or input from governors and represents an unprecedented shift in authority from governors as commanders and chief of the Guard to the federal government," the governors state in the letter.
As of yesterday, 51 governors, including some from U.S. territories, had signed the letter, a sign of broad bipartisan support that underscores the depth of opposition among state executives to encroachments by Washington on their powers.
The governors discovered the provision two weeks ago, and the effort to have it removed from the defense bill began at last week's National Governors Association summer meeting in Charleston, S.C.
(More ... Governors Oppose Federal Control of Guard) ¶ 21:27 0 comments
8.12.2006
Can the GOP Use Terrorism to Win -- Again? (CNN.com)
Suspected plot to blow up airliners puts issue front and center
By Bill Schneider
CNN Senior Political Analyst
Friday, August 11, 2006; Posted: 2:07 p.m. EDT (18:07 GMT)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Could there be political fallout in the United States from the terror arrests in Britain?
Typically, when Americans become fearful their support for the president tends to go up. President Bush and the Republican Party used the security issue to their advantage in the previous two elections, when they portrayed Democrats as weak and vacillating. Republicans give every indication that they intend to run on the security issue again in 2006.
Vice President Dick Cheney said on Wednesday that one thing he found disturbing about the defeat of Sen. Joe Lieberman in the Connecticut Democratic primary on Tuesday was that "our adversaries in this conflict, the al Qaeda types, clearly are betting on the proposition that ultimately they can break the will of the American people." (Cheney made the comments after he was briefed on the suspected terror plot, according to a senior administration official.)
Republicans may use the issue against Democrats who voted against renewal of the Patriot Act this year. In the House of Representatives, 123 "no" votes were cast by Democrats running either for re-election or for another office. Three "no" votes were cast by Democratic senators seeking re-election -- Daniel Akaka of Hawaii, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico and Robert Byrd of West Virginia.
(More ... CNN.com - Can the GOP use terrorism to win -- again? - Aug 11, 2006) ¶ 20:49 0 comments
By Bill Schneider
CNN Senior Political Analyst
Friday, August 11, 2006; Posted: 2:07 p.m. EDT (18:07 GMT)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Could there be political fallout in the United States from the terror arrests in Britain?
Typically, when Americans become fearful their support for the president tends to go up. President Bush and the Republican Party used the security issue to their advantage in the previous two elections, when they portrayed Democrats as weak and vacillating. Republicans give every indication that they intend to run on the security issue again in 2006.
Vice President Dick Cheney said on Wednesday that one thing he found disturbing about the defeat of Sen. Joe Lieberman in the Connecticut Democratic primary on Tuesday was that "our adversaries in this conflict, the al Qaeda types, clearly are betting on the proposition that ultimately they can break the will of the American people." (Cheney made the comments after he was briefed on the suspected terror plot, according to a senior administration official.)
Republicans may use the issue against Democrats who voted against renewal of the Patriot Act this year. In the House of Representatives, 123 "no" votes were cast by Democrats running either for re-election or for another office. Three "no" votes were cast by Democratic senators seeking re-election -- Daniel Akaka of Hawaii, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico and Robert Byrd of West Virginia.
(More ... CNN.com - Can the GOP use terrorism to win -- again? - Aug 11, 2006) ¶ 20:49 0 comments
W.House Defends Cheney on Remarks About Democrats (Reuters.com)
By Steve Holland
CRAWFORD, Texas (Reuters) - Vice President Dick Cheney was unaware arrests in an alleged terror plot in Britain were imminent when he accused Democrats of being soft on national security, the White House said on Friday.
Democrats have accused Cheney of trying to use the arrests of suspects in the British plot to Republican advantage in November congressional elections in which control of the U.S. Congress is at stake.
Cheney said on Wednesday the defeat of Sen. Joe Lieberman in Connecticut's Democratic primary on Tuesday over his support of the Iraq war could embolden "the al Qaeda types" who believe the United States would cut and run if put under enough pressure.
Early Thursday, British authorities announced two dozen arrests in an alleged plot to blow up airliners using liquid explosives on flights from Britain to the United States.
Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada said in a statement on Friday: "Once again, GOP (Republican) leaders are using terrorism and our national security as a political wedge issue. It is disgusting -- but not surprising."
He added: "Even more disgraceful is that when Cheney made those comments, he had been briefed on the Britain terror plot. There are simply no boundaries for these people. In their minds, our national security and their continued hold on power are one and the same. And they will stop at nothing to keep it that way."
(More ... W.House defends Cheney on remarks about Democrats | Politics News | Reuters.com) ¶ 20:43 0 comments
CRAWFORD, Texas (Reuters) - Vice President Dick Cheney was unaware arrests in an alleged terror plot in Britain were imminent when he accused Democrats of being soft on national security, the White House said on Friday.
Democrats have accused Cheney of trying to use the arrests of suspects in the British plot to Republican advantage in November congressional elections in which control of the U.S. Congress is at stake.
Cheney said on Wednesday the defeat of Sen. Joe Lieberman in Connecticut's Democratic primary on Tuesday over his support of the Iraq war could embolden "the al Qaeda types" who believe the United States would cut and run if put under enough pressure.
Early Thursday, British authorities announced two dozen arrests in an alleged plot to blow up airliners using liquid explosives on flights from Britain to the United States.
Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada said in a statement on Friday: "Once again, GOP (Republican) leaders are using terrorism and our national security as a political wedge issue. It is disgusting -- but not surprising."
He added: "Even more disgraceful is that when Cheney made those comments, he had been briefed on the Britain terror plot. There are simply no boundaries for these people. In their minds, our national security and their continued hold on power are one and the same. And they will stop at nothing to keep it that way."
(More ... W.House defends Cheney on remarks about Democrats | Politics News | Reuters.com) ¶ 20:43 0 comments
Bush Staff Wanted Bomb-detect Cash Moved (USATODAY.com)
(AP) — While the British terror suspects were hatching their plot, the Bush administration was quietly seeking permission to divert $6 million that was supposed to be spent this year developing new homeland explosives detection technology.
Congressional leaders rejected the idea, the latest in a series of steps by the Homeland Security Department that has left lawmakers and some of the department's own experts questioning the commitment to create better anti-terror technologies.
Homeland Security's research arm, called the Sciences & Technology Directorate, is a "rudderless ship without a clear way to get back on course," Republican and Democratic senators on the Appropriations Committee declared recently.
"The committee is extremely disappointed with the manner in which S&T is being managed within the Department of Homeland Security," the panel wrote June 29 in a bipartisan report accompanying the agency's 2007 budget.
Rep. Martin Sabo, D-Minn., who joined Republicans to block the administration's recent diversion of explosives detection money, said research and development is crucial to thwarting future attacks and there is bipartisan agreement that Homeland Security has fallen short.
"They clearly have been given lots of resources that they haven't been using," Sabo said.
(More ... USATODAY.com - Bush staff wanted bomb-detect cash moved) ¶ 20:39 0 comments
Congressional leaders rejected the idea, the latest in a series of steps by the Homeland Security Department that has left lawmakers and some of the department's own experts questioning the commitment to create better anti-terror technologies.
Homeland Security's research arm, called the Sciences & Technology Directorate, is a "rudderless ship without a clear way to get back on course," Republican and Democratic senators on the Appropriations Committee declared recently.
"The committee is extremely disappointed with the manner in which S&T is being managed within the Department of Homeland Security," the panel wrote June 29 in a bipartisan report accompanying the agency's 2007 budget.
Rep. Martin Sabo, D-Minn., who joined Republicans to block the administration's recent diversion of explosives detection money, said research and development is crucial to thwarting future attacks and there is bipartisan agreement that Homeland Security has fallen short.
"They clearly have been given lots of resources that they haven't been using," Sabo said.
(More ... USATODAY.com - Bush staff wanted bomb-detect cash moved) ¶ 20:39 0 comments
Greenland's Ice Cap is Melting at a Frighteningly Fast Rate (SFGate.com)
David Perlman, Chronicle Science Editor
Friday, August 11, 2006
The vast ice cap that covers Greenland nearly three miles thick is melting faster than ever before on record, and the pace is speeding year by year, according to global climate watchers gathering data from twin satellites that probe the effects of warming on the huge northern island.
The consequence is already evident in a small but ominous rise in sea levels around the world, a pace that is also accelerating, the scientists say.
According to the scientists' data, Greenland's ice is melting at a rate three times faster than it was only five years ago. The estimate of the melting trend that has been observed for nearly a decade comes from a University of Texas team monitoring a satellite mission that measures changes in the Earth's gravity over the entire Greenland ice cap as the ice melts and the water flows down into the Arctic ocean.
"We have only been watching the ice cap melt during a relatively short period," physicist Jianli Chen said Thursday, "but we are seeing the strongest evidence of it yet, and in the near future the pace of melting will accelerate even more."
The same satellites tracking Greenland's ice cap also are monitoring the melt rate of Antarctica's ice cover, and there too the melting is adding to the global rise in sea level, according to another team of scientists.
Next to Antarctica, Greenland, a self-governing Danish territory, is the largest reservoir of fresh water on Earth and holds about 10 percent of the world's supply. The increasing flow of fresh water -- most of it from glaciers melting on Greenland's eastern coast -- is already beginning to change the composition of the ocean's salt water currents flowing past Northwestern Europe, the scientists say.
The result could be a critical change in the composition of the main ocean current that flows past Europe's northern edge, blocking off warmer waters that normally flow there and -- ironically -- making Northern Europe's weather colder than normal, at least temporarily, while the rest of the globe continues warming.
(More ... Greenland's ice cap is melting at a frighteningly fast rate) ¶ 20:17 0 comments
Friday, August 11, 2006
The vast ice cap that covers Greenland nearly three miles thick is melting faster than ever before on record, and the pace is speeding year by year, according to global climate watchers gathering data from twin satellites that probe the effects of warming on the huge northern island.
The consequence is already evident in a small but ominous rise in sea levels around the world, a pace that is also accelerating, the scientists say.
According to the scientists' data, Greenland's ice is melting at a rate three times faster than it was only five years ago. The estimate of the melting trend that has been observed for nearly a decade comes from a University of Texas team monitoring a satellite mission that measures changes in the Earth's gravity over the entire Greenland ice cap as the ice melts and the water flows down into the Arctic ocean.
"We have only been watching the ice cap melt during a relatively short period," physicist Jianli Chen said Thursday, "but we are seeing the strongest evidence of it yet, and in the near future the pace of melting will accelerate even more."
The same satellites tracking Greenland's ice cap also are monitoring the melt rate of Antarctica's ice cover, and there too the melting is adding to the global rise in sea level, according to another team of scientists.
Next to Antarctica, Greenland, a self-governing Danish territory, is the largest reservoir of fresh water on Earth and holds about 10 percent of the world's supply. The increasing flow of fresh water -- most of it from glaciers melting on Greenland's eastern coast -- is already beginning to change the composition of the ocean's salt water currents flowing past Northwestern Europe, the scientists say.
The result could be a critical change in the composition of the main ocean current that flows past Europe's northern edge, blocking off warmer waters that normally flow there and -- ironically -- making Northern Europe's weather colder than normal, at least temporarily, while the rest of the globe continues warming.
(More ... Greenland's ice cap is melting at a frighteningly fast rate) ¶ 20:17 0 comments
8.09.2006
Lieberman Loses Battle Over War (Reuters.com)
Wed Aug 9, 2006 12:56am ET162
By John Whitesides, Political Correspondent
HARTFORD, Connecticut (Reuters) - Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman lost a Democratic Party showdown to a relative unknown on Tuesday, a casualty of voter anger over his support for the war in Iraq and President George W. Bush.
Six years after he was chosen the Democratic vice presidential nominee, Lieberman fell in a tight Senate primary battle to wealthy businessman Ned Lamont, who called him a cheerleader for Bush and urged voters to send an anti-war message to the country.
Lieberman conceded defeat but said he would file petitions on Wednesday to run as an independent in November.
"Tomorrow, we launch a new campaign to unite the people of Connecticut," he told cheering supporters at a downtown Hartford hotel. "If you're fed up with the nasty partisanship in Washington, then I ask your help."
Lamont's outsider bid to unseat the three-term senator in Democratic-leaning Connecticut offered a gauge of anti-war sentiment among voters before the election in November, when control of Congress will be up for grabs.
"Connecticut voters do not call for change lightly but today we called for change decisively. No more stay the course," Lamont told supporters at a victory celebration in Meriden, where he was flanked by black leaders Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.
(More ... Lieberman loses battle over war | Politics News | Reuters.com) ¶ 20:57 0 comments
By John Whitesides, Political Correspondent
HARTFORD, Connecticut (Reuters) - Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman lost a Democratic Party showdown to a relative unknown on Tuesday, a casualty of voter anger over his support for the war in Iraq and President George W. Bush.
Six years after he was chosen the Democratic vice presidential nominee, Lieberman fell in a tight Senate primary battle to wealthy businessman Ned Lamont, who called him a cheerleader for Bush and urged voters to send an anti-war message to the country.
Lieberman conceded defeat but said he would file petitions on Wednesday to run as an independent in November.
"Tomorrow, we launch a new campaign to unite the people of Connecticut," he told cheering supporters at a downtown Hartford hotel. "If you're fed up with the nasty partisanship in Washington, then I ask your help."
Lamont's outsider bid to unseat the three-term senator in Democratic-leaning Connecticut offered a gauge of anti-war sentiment among voters before the election in November, when control of Congress will be up for grabs.
"Connecticut voters do not call for change lightly but today we called for change decisively. No more stay the course," Lamont told supporters at a victory celebration in Meriden, where he was flanked by black leaders Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.
(More ... Lieberman loses battle over war | Politics News | Reuters.com) ¶ 20:57 0 comments
War Crimes Act Changes Would Reduce Threat Of Prosecution (WashingtonPost.com)
By R. Jeffrey Smith
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, August 9, 2006; Page A01
The Bush administration has drafted amendments to a war crimes law that would eliminate the risk of prosecution for political appointees, CIA officers and former military personnel for humiliating or degrading war prisoners, according to U.S. officials and a copy of the amendments.
Officials say the amendments would alter a U.S. law passed in the mid-1990s that criminalized violations of the Geneva Conventions, a set of international treaties governing military conduct in wartime. The conventions generally bar the cruel, humiliating and degrading treatment of wartime prisoners without spelling out what all those terms mean.
The draft U.S. amendments to the War Crimes Act would narrow the scope of potential criminal prosecutions to 10 specific categories of illegal acts against detainees during a war, including torture, murder, rape and hostage-taking.
Left off the list would be what the Geneva Conventions refer to as "outrages upon [the] personal dignity" of a prisoner and deliberately humiliating acts -- such as the forced nakedness, use of dog leashes and wearing of women's underwear seen at the U.S.-run Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq -- that fall short of torture.
"People have gotten worried, thinking that it's quite likely they might be under a microscope," said a U.S. official. Foreigners are using accusations of unlawful U.S. behavior as a way to rein in American power, the official said, and the amendments are partly meant to fend this off.
(More ... War Crimes Act Changes Would Reduce Threat Of Prosecution) ¶ 20:50 0 comments
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, August 9, 2006; Page A01
The Bush administration has drafted amendments to a war crimes law that would eliminate the risk of prosecution for political appointees, CIA officers and former military personnel for humiliating or degrading war prisoners, according to U.S. officials and a copy of the amendments.
Officials say the amendments would alter a U.S. law passed in the mid-1990s that criminalized violations of the Geneva Conventions, a set of international treaties governing military conduct in wartime. The conventions generally bar the cruel, humiliating and degrading treatment of wartime prisoners without spelling out what all those terms mean.
The draft U.S. amendments to the War Crimes Act would narrow the scope of potential criminal prosecutions to 10 specific categories of illegal acts against detainees during a war, including torture, murder, rape and hostage-taking.
Left off the list would be what the Geneva Conventions refer to as "outrages upon [the] personal dignity" of a prisoner and deliberately humiliating acts -- such as the forced nakedness, use of dog leashes and wearing of women's underwear seen at the U.S.-run Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq -- that fall short of torture.
"People have gotten worried, thinking that it's quite likely they might be under a microscope," said a U.S. official. Foreigners are using accusations of unlawful U.S. behavior as a way to rein in American power, the official said, and the amendments are partly meant to fend this off.
(More ... War Crimes Act Changes Would Reduce Threat Of Prosecution) ¶ 20:50 0 comments
8.06.2006
'Dead Zone' Threat to US Suburban Dream (Guardian.co.uk)
Petrol price rises may cause the housing bubble to burst, triggering global recession and the fall of America's Eden, writes Paul Harris in New York
Sunday August 6, 2006
The Observer
Levitown is a bus ride beyond the aptly named Hicksville in the outer suburbs of New York. Its lawns are neat and its houses boxy. From many gardens fly American flags and yellow ribbons: typical displays of suburban patriotism.
It was here, almost 60 years ago, that modern American suburbia was born. Work began on the town in 1947 and Long Island potato fields were soon covered with a radical new form of housing: single, similar, purpose-built houses designed for car-owners and aimed at families. At the time it was a shock. Social scientists scoffed at Levittown. But within decades the suburban experiment had come to define US life and what began in Levittown now covers the country in urban sprawl, strip malls and a way of life revolving around the car.
Now there are fears it is coming to an end. For the past five years America has been gripped by a housing price bubble. It has funded a huge expansion of suburbia as Americans poured their wealth into their homes. Yet many think that bubble may be about to burst. That would send shock waves through the US economy and into the rest of the world. Nor is that the only threat. The rising price of oil is squeezing suburbanites. It threatens a way of life where pavements are rare and everyone moves by car.
'We have invested all our wealth in a living arrangement with no future,' said James Howard Kunstler, author of the Long Emergency which postulates the end of suburbia. 'In building suburbia we embarked on the greatest misallocation of wealth in the history of the world.'
(More ... The Observer | World | 'Dead zone' threat to US suburban dream) ¶ 18:46 0 comments
Sunday August 6, 2006
The Observer
Levitown is a bus ride beyond the aptly named Hicksville in the outer suburbs of New York. Its lawns are neat and its houses boxy. From many gardens fly American flags and yellow ribbons: typical displays of suburban patriotism.
It was here, almost 60 years ago, that modern American suburbia was born. Work began on the town in 1947 and Long Island potato fields were soon covered with a radical new form of housing: single, similar, purpose-built houses designed for car-owners and aimed at families. At the time it was a shock. Social scientists scoffed at Levittown. But within decades the suburban experiment had come to define US life and what began in Levittown now covers the country in urban sprawl, strip malls and a way of life revolving around the car.
Now there are fears it is coming to an end. For the past five years America has been gripped by a housing price bubble. It has funded a huge expansion of suburbia as Americans poured their wealth into their homes. Yet many think that bubble may be about to burst. That would send shock waves through the US economy and into the rest of the world. Nor is that the only threat. The rising price of oil is squeezing suburbanites. It threatens a way of life where pavements are rare and everyone moves by car.
'We have invested all our wealth in a living arrangement with no future,' said James Howard Kunstler, author of the Long Emergency which postulates the end of suburbia. 'In building suburbia we embarked on the greatest misallocation of wealth in the history of the world.'
(More ... The Observer | World | 'Dead zone' threat to US suburban dream) ¶ 18:46 0 comments
Centrism Is for Suckers (NYTimes.com)
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: August 4, 2006
If you want to understand the state of America today, a good place to start is with the contrast between the political strategies of conservative business advocacy groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and those of more or less liberal advocacy groups like the Sierra Club.
The chamber recently got into trouble because of ads it ran praising Republican members of Congress who, it said, voted for the Medicare prescription drug program. It turned out that one of the congressmen praised in the ads actually voted against the program, while two others weren’t even in Congress when the vote took place.
Oops. But the bigger question is, aren’t business groups supposed to favor fiscal responsibility and reducing the size of government? So why is the chamber praising a program that substantially increases the size of government and has no visible means of financial support?
The answer is obvious: the Bush administration hopes to win some votes in the midterm elections from older Americans now receiving drug benefits, and the chamber, like many conservative organizations these days, believes that its interests are best served by helping Republicans win elections. If the administration and its allies in Congress want the chamber’s support on an issue, they get it, never mind the details.
If you want an even starker example, consider the fact that the National Federation of Independent Business, the small-business lobby, is supporting the bizarre, hybrid wage-and-tax legislation now before the Senate. This legislation would raise the minimum wage while sharply cutting taxes on very large estates.
(More ... Centrism Is for Suckers - New York Times) ¶ 12:01 0 comments
Published: August 4, 2006
If you want to understand the state of America today, a good place to start is with the contrast between the political strategies of conservative business advocacy groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and those of more or less liberal advocacy groups like the Sierra Club.
The chamber recently got into trouble because of ads it ran praising Republican members of Congress who, it said, voted for the Medicare prescription drug program. It turned out that one of the congressmen praised in the ads actually voted against the program, while two others weren’t even in Congress when the vote took place.
Oops. But the bigger question is, aren’t business groups supposed to favor fiscal responsibility and reducing the size of government? So why is the chamber praising a program that substantially increases the size of government and has no visible means of financial support?
The answer is obvious: the Bush administration hopes to win some votes in the midterm elections from older Americans now receiving drug benefits, and the chamber, like many conservative organizations these days, believes that its interests are best served by helping Republicans win elections. If the administration and its allies in Congress want the chamber’s support on an issue, they get it, never mind the details.
If you want an even starker example, consider the fact that the National Federation of Independent Business, the small-business lobby, is supporting the bizarre, hybrid wage-and-tax legislation now before the Senate. This legislation would raise the minimum wage while sharply cutting taxes on very large estates.
(More ... Centrism Is for Suckers - New York Times) ¶ 12:01 0 comments
8.05.2006
Au Revoir, Freedom Fries (NYTimes.com)
Published: August 4, 2006
When Congress renamed the French fries sold in its cafeterias “freedom fries” before the Iraq war, Bob Ney, whose position as House Administration Committee chairman put him in charge of the cafeterias, said the change registered “the strong displeasure of many on Capitol Hill with the actions of our so-called ally, France.” In the real world, it mainly allowed people to register their strong displeasure at how juvenile Congress was being.
In the last few weeks, as The Washington Times reported, Congress has quietly changed the name back. We could think of many good reasons for the move. “Freedom fries,” like the “mission accomplished” banner that President Bush stood in front of a few months later, is now a stale relic of a naïve time, when the war’s supporters were convinced that Iraqis would be free right after they finished greeting their liberators with rose petals.
The renaming also was the embodiment of President Bush’s my-way-or-the-highway diplomacy. A French Embassy spokeswoman gamely told The Associated Press at the time that “we are at a very serious moment dealing with very serious issues, and we are not focusing on the name you give to potatoes.” But “freedom fries” was intended to be, and was, a poke in France’s eye. Harassing the French is probably not the wisest course now that America may need their help negotiating a ceasefire in Lebanon.
We would like to think that such sound policy reasons — or just that “freedom fries” was so incredibly stupid — account for the change. But the real reason appears to be that Mr. Ney was forced to give up his chairmanship of the committee because of his extensive ties to the disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff. The current chairman, Vernon Ehlers of Michigan, seems more sensible about both intergovernmental affairs and cafeteria management.
(More ... Au Revoir, Freedom Fries - New York Times) ¶ 14:32 0 comments
When Congress renamed the French fries sold in its cafeterias “freedom fries” before the Iraq war, Bob Ney, whose position as House Administration Committee chairman put him in charge of the cafeterias, said the change registered “the strong displeasure of many on Capitol Hill with the actions of our so-called ally, France.” In the real world, it mainly allowed people to register their strong displeasure at how juvenile Congress was being.
In the last few weeks, as The Washington Times reported, Congress has quietly changed the name back. We could think of many good reasons for the move. “Freedom fries,” like the “mission accomplished” banner that President Bush stood in front of a few months later, is now a stale relic of a naïve time, when the war’s supporters were convinced that Iraqis would be free right after they finished greeting their liberators with rose petals.
The renaming also was the embodiment of President Bush’s my-way-or-the-highway diplomacy. A French Embassy spokeswoman gamely told The Associated Press at the time that “we are at a very serious moment dealing with very serious issues, and we are not focusing on the name you give to potatoes.” But “freedom fries” was intended to be, and was, a poke in France’s eye. Harassing the French is probably not the wisest course now that America may need their help negotiating a ceasefire in Lebanon.
We would like to think that such sound policy reasons — or just that “freedom fries” was so incredibly stupid — account for the change. But the real reason appears to be that Mr. Ney was forced to give up his chairmanship of the committee because of his extensive ties to the disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff. The current chairman, Vernon Ehlers of Michigan, seems more sensible about both intergovernmental affairs and cafeteria management.
(More ... Au Revoir, Freedom Fries - New York Times) ¶ 14:32 0 comments
8.03.2006
Evolution Fight Shifts Direction in Kansas Vote (NYTimes.com)
By MONICA DAVEY and RALPH BLUMENTHAL
Published: August 3, 2006
TOPEKA, Kan., Aug. 2 — Less than a year after the Kansas Board of Education adopted science standards that were the most wide-reaching in the nation in challenging Darwin’s theory of evolution, voters on Tuesday ousted the conservative majority on the board that favored those guidelines.
Several of the winners in the primary election, whose victories are virtually certain to shift the board to at least a 6-to-4 moderate majority in November, promised Wednesday to work swiftly to restore a science curriculum that does not subject evolution to critical attack.
They also said they would try to eliminate restrictions on sex education passed by the current board and to review the status of the education commissioner, Bob Corkins, who they said was hired last year with little background in education.
In a state where a fierce fight over how much students should be taught about the criticism of evolution has gone back and forth since 1999, the election results were seen as a significant defeat for the movement of intelligent design, which holds that nature by itself cannot account for life’s complexity.
Defenders of evolution pointed to the results in Kansas as a third major defeat for the intelligent design movement across the country recently and a sign, perhaps, that the public was beginning to pay attention to the movement’s details and, they said, its failings.
“I think more citizens are learning what intelligent design really is and realizing that they don’t really want that taught in their public schools,” said Eugenie C. Scott, director of the National Center for Science Education.
(More ... Evolution Fight Shifts Direction in Kansas Vote - New York Times) ¶ 19:40 0 comments
Published: August 3, 2006
TOPEKA, Kan., Aug. 2 — Less than a year after the Kansas Board of Education adopted science standards that were the most wide-reaching in the nation in challenging Darwin’s theory of evolution, voters on Tuesday ousted the conservative majority on the board that favored those guidelines.
Several of the winners in the primary election, whose victories are virtually certain to shift the board to at least a 6-to-4 moderate majority in November, promised Wednesday to work swiftly to restore a science curriculum that does not subject evolution to critical attack.
They also said they would try to eliminate restrictions on sex education passed by the current board and to review the status of the education commissioner, Bob Corkins, who they said was hired last year with little background in education.
In a state where a fierce fight over how much students should be taught about the criticism of evolution has gone back and forth since 1999, the election results were seen as a significant defeat for the movement of intelligent design, which holds that nature by itself cannot account for life’s complexity.
Defenders of evolution pointed to the results in Kansas as a third major defeat for the intelligent design movement across the country recently and a sign, perhaps, that the public was beginning to pay attention to the movement’s details and, they said, its failings.
“I think more citizens are learning what intelligent design really is and realizing that they don’t really want that taught in their public schools,” said Eugenie C. Scott, director of the National Center for Science Education.
(More ... Evolution Fight Shifts Direction in Kansas Vote - New York Times) ¶ 19:40 0 comments
8.01.2006
Blair Signs Climate Pact With Schwarzenegger (Guardian.co.uk)
· California deal paves way to joining EU scheme
· Agreement represents snub to White House
Patrick Wintour, political editor
Tuesday August 1, 2006
The Guardian
Tony Blair yesterday sidestepped the Bush administration's refusal to act on climate change by signing what was hailed as a ground-breaking agreement with California, the world's 12th largest carbon emitter, to fight global warming.
Downing Street made no attempt to disguise the fact that the deal is designed to get round Republican objections to states imposing mechanisms to cut carbon emissions. With other US states also interested or involved in carbon trading markets, the path is being opened to bring US business into international efforts to fight climate change, even though international progress has been stymied by the Bush administration's refusal to sign up to binding targets in the Kyoto protocol.
Mr Blair signed the statement of intent yesterday with California's governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, saying it would lay the groundwork for a new transatlantic market in carbon dioxide emissions.
The prime minister wants to create a coalition of the willing among those US states prepared to join the European Union's carbon trading scheme. The Blair-Schwarzenegger deal came at a meeting in Long Beach organised by Steve Howard, CEO of the Climate Group, an international charity working to cut greenhouse gas emissions, and Lord Browne, chairman of British Petroleum. Virgin's Sir Richard Branson was also present.
The two-year-old EU carbon trading scheme sets country-by-country overall caps for carbon, and rewards individual companies which find a profitable way to minimise carbon emissions.
(More ... Guardian Unlimited Politics | Special Reports | Blair signs climate pact with Schwarzenegger) ¶ 20:25 0 comments
· Agreement represents snub to White House
Patrick Wintour, political editor
Tuesday August 1, 2006
The Guardian
Tony Blair yesterday sidestepped the Bush administration's refusal to act on climate change by signing what was hailed as a ground-breaking agreement with California, the world's 12th largest carbon emitter, to fight global warming.
Downing Street made no attempt to disguise the fact that the deal is designed to get round Republican objections to states imposing mechanisms to cut carbon emissions. With other US states also interested or involved in carbon trading markets, the path is being opened to bring US business into international efforts to fight climate change, even though international progress has been stymied by the Bush administration's refusal to sign up to binding targets in the Kyoto protocol.
Mr Blair signed the statement of intent yesterday with California's governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, saying it would lay the groundwork for a new transatlantic market in carbon dioxide emissions.
The prime minister wants to create a coalition of the willing among those US states prepared to join the European Union's carbon trading scheme. The Blair-Schwarzenegger deal came at a meeting in Long Beach organised by Steve Howard, CEO of the Climate Group, an international charity working to cut greenhouse gas emissions, and Lord Browne, chairman of British Petroleum. Virgin's Sir Richard Branson was also present.
The two-year-old EU carbon trading scheme sets country-by-country overall caps for carbon, and rewards individual companies which find a profitable way to minimise carbon emissions.
(More ... Guardian Unlimited Politics | Special Reports | Blair signs climate pact with Schwarzenegger) ¶ 20:25 0 comments
Britain, Calif. to Work Together on Global Warming (Reuters.com)
Mon Jul 31, 2006 11:07pm ET160
By Adrian Croft and Timothy Gardner
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, accusing Washington of lacking leadership on the environment, committed his state on Monday to work with Britain to reduce greenhouse gases linked to global warming.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair joined Schwarzenegger and leading businessmen to announce the agreement under which Britain and California will collaborate on research into clean energy technologies and California will study the British experience of greenhouse gas emissions trading.
Most scientists link greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide emitted from the burning of fossil fuels to global warming that could lead to heat waves, stronger storms, and flooding from rising sea levels.
Schwarzenegger has pursued a strong environmental agenda, putting him at odds with fellow Republican President George W. Bush, who withdrew the United States from the Kyoto Protocol on global warming in 2001, saying its caps on greenhouse gases would cost jobs.
"We see that there is not great leadership from the federal government when it comes to protecting the environment, so this is why we as a state move forward with it, because we want to show leadership," Schwarzenegger told a joint news conference with Blair held on the dockside at Long Beach, California.
Blair said the agreement with California "will allow us to explore how both of us ... can combine together in research, in technology, but also in trying to evolve market mechanisms that allow us to reduce carbon dioxide emissions."
(More ... Britain, Calif. to work together on global warming | US News | Reuters.com) ¶ 20:20 0 comments
By Adrian Croft and Timothy Gardner
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, accusing Washington of lacking leadership on the environment, committed his state on Monday to work with Britain to reduce greenhouse gases linked to global warming.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair joined Schwarzenegger and leading businessmen to announce the agreement under which Britain and California will collaborate on research into clean energy technologies and California will study the British experience of greenhouse gas emissions trading.
Most scientists link greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide emitted from the burning of fossil fuels to global warming that could lead to heat waves, stronger storms, and flooding from rising sea levels.
Schwarzenegger has pursued a strong environmental agenda, putting him at odds with fellow Republican President George W. Bush, who withdrew the United States from the Kyoto Protocol on global warming in 2001, saying its caps on greenhouse gases would cost jobs.
"We see that there is not great leadership from the federal government when it comes to protecting the environment, so this is why we as a state move forward with it, because we want to show leadership," Schwarzenegger told a joint news conference with Blair held on the dockside at Long Beach, California.
Blair said the agreement with California "will allow us to explore how both of us ... can combine together in research, in technology, but also in trying to evolve market mechanisms that allow us to reduce carbon dioxide emissions."
(More ... Britain, Calif. to work together on global warming | US News | Reuters.com) ¶ 20:20 0 comments
