Scandals and Missteps Dog New Nevada Governor | By Sonya Geis | Washington Post Staff Writer | Monday, April 2, 2007; A03
As Jim Gibbons campaigned for the Nevada governorship last fall, the five-term Republican congressman ricocheted from scandal to scandal and from gaffe to gaffe. When he squeaked to a narrow victory with 48 percent of the vote, he hoped to be able to focus on his legislative agenda and put his problems behind him.
Things have not turned out that way.
Since Gibbons took office, his troubles have only increased. The FBI is investigating gifts from a friend to whom Gibbons steered business while he was in Congress. In March, Gibbons revealed he had established a legal defense fund last fall, raising questions about whether he used unreported money from his campaign. And last week the Wall Street Journal reported Gibbons's wife was a consultant to a company that Gibbons helped to get a federal contract.
Meanwhile, the local press mocks the governor's apparent ignorance about his own legislative proposals. ...
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
Friday, March 30, 2007
Sen. Feinstein voted for appropriations worth billions to her husband's firms
Senator Feinstein's Iraq Conflict | By Peter Byrne | January 24-30, 2007
As a member of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee, Sen. Feinstein voted for appropriations worth billions to her husband's firms
In the November 2006 election, the voters demanded congressional ethics reform. And so, the newly appointed chairman of the Senate Rules Committee, Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., is now duly in charge of regulating the ethical behavior of her colleagues. But for many years, Feinstein has been beset by her own ethical conflict of interest, say congressional ethics experts.
As chairperson and ranking member of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee (MILCON) from 2001 through the end of 2005, Feinstein supervised the appropriation of billions of dollars a year for specific military construction projects. Two defense contractors whose interests were largely controlled by her husband, financier Richard C. Blum, benefited from decisions made by Feinstein as leader of this powerful subcommittee.
Each year, MILCON's members decide which military construction projects will be funded from a roster proposed by the Department of Defense. Contracts to build these specific projects are subsequently awarded to such major defense contractors as Halliburton, Fluor, Parsons, Louis Berger, URS Corporation and Perini Corporation. From 1997 through the end of 2005, with Feinstein's knowledge, Blum was a majority owner of both URS Corp. and Perini Corp. ...
As a member of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee, Sen. Feinstein voted for appropriations worth billions to her husband's firms
In the November 2006 election, the voters demanded congressional ethics reform. And so, the newly appointed chairman of the Senate Rules Committee, Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., is now duly in charge of regulating the ethical behavior of her colleagues. But for many years, Feinstein has been beset by her own ethical conflict of interest, say congressional ethics experts.
As chairperson and ranking member of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee (MILCON) from 2001 through the end of 2005, Feinstein supervised the appropriation of billions of dollars a year for specific military construction projects. Two defense contractors whose interests were largely controlled by her husband, financier Richard C. Blum, benefited from decisions made by Feinstein as leader of this powerful subcommittee.
Each year, MILCON's members decide which military construction projects will be funded from a roster proposed by the Department of Defense. Contracts to build these specific projects are subsequently awarded to such major defense contractors as Halliburton, Fluor, Parsons, Louis Berger, URS Corporation and Perini Corporation. From 1997 through the end of 2005, with Feinstein's knowledge, Blum was a majority owner of both URS Corp. and Perini Corp. ...
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Bush Administration’s Secret Plan To ‘Gut’ Endangered Species Act Revealed
Bush Administration’s Secret Plan To ‘Gut’ Endangered Species Act Revealed
A 117-page document obtained by Salon.com highlights a “secretive plan” by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to “gut” the Endangered Species Act.
The law, which is credited with saving the American Bald Eagle from extinction,” would be changed to limit the number of species that can be protected,” curtail preserved acres of wildlife habitat, and “dilute legal barriers that protect habitat from sprawl, logging or mining.”
These proposed changes are the latest in the Bush administration’s attempts to weaken the Endangered Species Act in favor of special interests:
– Scientists pressured to alter findings. FWS scientists had been “forced to alter or withhold findings that would have led to greater protections for endangered species,” according to a 2005 survey.
– Political appointees overruled scientists’ findings in favor of industry positions. Deputy Assistant Secretary Julie MacDonald consistently “rejected staff scientists’ recommendations to protect imperiled animals and plants under the Endangered Species Act.” She called scientific studies “opinion” and told employees to treat them “as we would treat an industry publication.”
– FWS lists fewer endangered species under Bush. Since January 2000, President Bush has listed only 57 species as endangered — “fewer than any other administration in history.” George H. W. Bush listed 234 and Bill Clinton listed 512.
The proposed changes are also “littered with language lifted directly” from former Rep. Richard Pombo’s (R-CA) failed attempt in the 109th Congress to cripple the Endangered Species Act, and mirrors legislation that current Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthrorne — who oversees the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service — attempted (and failed) to pass while in the Senate in 1998. ...
A 117-page document obtained by Salon.com highlights a “secretive plan” by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to “gut” the Endangered Species Act.
The law, which is credited with saving the American Bald Eagle from extinction,” would be changed to limit the number of species that can be protected,” curtail preserved acres of wildlife habitat, and “dilute legal barriers that protect habitat from sprawl, logging or mining.”
These proposed changes are the latest in the Bush administration’s attempts to weaken the Endangered Species Act in favor of special interests:
– Scientists pressured to alter findings. FWS scientists had been “forced to alter or withhold findings that would have led to greater protections for endangered species,” according to a 2005 survey.
– Political appointees overruled scientists’ findings in favor of industry positions. Deputy Assistant Secretary Julie MacDonald consistently “rejected staff scientists’ recommendations to protect imperiled animals and plants under the Endangered Species Act.” She called scientific studies “opinion” and told employees to treat them “as we would treat an industry publication.”
– FWS lists fewer endangered species under Bush. Since January 2000, President Bush has listed only 57 species as endangered — “fewer than any other administration in history.” George H. W. Bush listed 234 and Bill Clinton listed 512.
The proposed changes are also “littered with language lifted directly” from former Rep. Richard Pombo’s (R-CA) failed attempt in the 109th Congress to cripple the Endangered Species Act, and mirrors legislation that current Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthrorne — who oversees the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service — attempted (and failed) to pass while in the Senate in 1998. ...
those chasing imaginary [voter] fraud are actually taking preventive steps that would disenfranchise millions of real live Americans ...
The Myth Of Voter Fraud | By Michael Waldman and Justin Levitt | Thursday, March 29, 2007; Page A19
As Congress probes the firing of eight U.S. attorneys, attention is centering on who knew what, and when. It's just as important to focus on "why," such as the reason given for the firing of at least one of the U.S. attorneys, John McKay of Washington state: failure to prosecute the phantom of individual voter fraud.
Allegations of voter fraud -- someone sneaking into the polls to cast an illicit vote -- have been pushed in recent years by partisans seeking to justify proof-of-citizenship and other restrictive ID requirements as a condition of voting. Scare stories abound on the Internet and on editorial pages, and they quickly become accepted wisdom.
But the notion of widespread voter fraud, as these prosecutors found out, is itself a fraud. Firing a prosecutor for failing to find wide voter fraud is like firing a park ranger for failing to find Sasquatch. Where fraud exists, of course, it should be prosecuted and punished. (And politicians have been stuffing ballot boxes and buying votes since senators wore togas; Lyndon Johnson won a 1948 Senate race after his partisans famously "found" a box of votes well after the election.) Yet evidence of actual fraud by individual voters is painfully skimpy.
...
Yet the stories have taken on the character of urban myth. Alarmingly, the Supreme Court suggested in a ruling last year ( Purcell v. Gonzalez) that fear of fraud might in some circumstances justify laws that have the consequence of disenfranchising voters. But it's already happening -- those chasing imaginary fraud are actually taking preventive steps that would disenfranchise millions of real live Americans. ...
As Congress probes the firing of eight U.S. attorneys, attention is centering on who knew what, and when. It's just as important to focus on "why," such as the reason given for the firing of at least one of the U.S. attorneys, John McKay of Washington state: failure to prosecute the phantom of individual voter fraud.
Allegations of voter fraud -- someone sneaking into the polls to cast an illicit vote -- have been pushed in recent years by partisans seeking to justify proof-of-citizenship and other restrictive ID requirements as a condition of voting. Scare stories abound on the Internet and on editorial pages, and they quickly become accepted wisdom.
But the notion of widespread voter fraud, as these prosecutors found out, is itself a fraud. Firing a prosecutor for failing to find wide voter fraud is like firing a park ranger for failing to find Sasquatch. Where fraud exists, of course, it should be prosecuted and punished. (And politicians have been stuffing ballot boxes and buying votes since senators wore togas; Lyndon Johnson won a 1948 Senate race after his partisans famously "found" a box of votes well after the election.) Yet evidence of actual fraud by individual voters is painfully skimpy.
...
Yet the stories have taken on the character of urban myth. Alarmingly, the Supreme Court suggested in a ruling last year ( Purcell v. Gonzalez) that fear of fraud might in some circumstances justify laws that have the consequence of disenfranchising voters. But it's already happening -- those chasing imaginary fraud are actually taking preventive steps that would disenfranchise millions of real live Americans. ...
TWO Australian soldiers who served in the first Iraq war have tested positive to depleted uranium (DU) contamination ... 15 years later!
Iraq diggers 'contaminated with radiation' | By Rosemary Desmond | March 27, 2007 04:42pm | Article from: AAP
TWO Australian soldiers who served in the first Iraq war have tested positive to depleted uranium (DU) contamination despite assurances from the Federal Government they had not been exposed, an anti-nuclear group said today.
Any such admission from the Government would leave it open to millions of dollars in compensation, said Pauline Rigby, project co-ordinator for the group Depleted Uranium Silent Killer (DUSK).
Urine samples from each of the men, who served in different areas of Iraq, were sent last year for uranium isotope analysis at the JW Goethe University in Germany at a cost of $1200 each under the auspices of DUSK and the Uranium Medical Research Centre (UMRC) in Canada, Ms Rigby said.
The results, now being evaluated for publication next month in two scientific journals, showed both men had tested positive to depleted uranium contamination more than 15 years after their return from the first Gulf War.
Ms Rigby said depleted uranium was the toxic and radioactive waste from the nuclear enrichment process.
Denser and heavier than lead, it is used as a projectile to penetrate heavy bunkers and tanks. ...
TWO Australian soldiers who served in the first Iraq war have tested positive to depleted uranium (DU) contamination despite assurances from the Federal Government they had not been exposed, an anti-nuclear group said today.
Any such admission from the Government would leave it open to millions of dollars in compensation, said Pauline Rigby, project co-ordinator for the group Depleted Uranium Silent Killer (DUSK).
Urine samples from each of the men, who served in different areas of Iraq, were sent last year for uranium isotope analysis at the JW Goethe University in Germany at a cost of $1200 each under the auspices of DUSK and the Uranium Medical Research Centre (UMRC) in Canada, Ms Rigby said.
The results, now being evaluated for publication next month in two scientific journals, showed both men had tested positive to depleted uranium contamination more than 15 years after their return from the first Gulf War.
Ms Rigby said depleted uranium was the toxic and radioactive waste from the nuclear enrichment process.
Denser and heavier than lead, it is used as a projectile to penetrate heavy bunkers and tanks. ...
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Gloabl Warming ... will wipe out numerous species that are unable to move: [see Administration efforts to suppress scientists and findings. ed]
Tuesday, March 27, 2007 by Guardian / UK | Global Warming Study Warns of Vanishing Climates | by James Randerson
By the end of the century up to two fifths of the land surface of the Earth will have a hotter climate unlike anything that currently exists, according to a study that predicts the effects of global warming on local and regional climates. And in the worst case scenario, the climatic conditions on another 48% of the land surface will no longer exist on the planet at all.The changes - which will have a devastating affect on biodiversity hotspots such as the Amazonian and Indonesian rainforests - will wipe out numerous species that are unable to move to stay within their preferred climate range. These species will either have to evolve rapidly or die out. ...
By the end of the century up to two fifths of the land surface of the Earth will have a hotter climate unlike anything that currently exists, according to a study that predicts the effects of global warming on local and regional climates. And in the worst case scenario, the climatic conditions on another 48% of the land surface will no longer exist on the planet at all.The changes - which will have a devastating affect on biodiversity hotspots such as the Amazonian and Indonesian rainforests - will wipe out numerous species that are unable to move to stay within their preferred climate range. These species will either have to evolve rapidly or die out. ...
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
globally averaged combined land and sea surface temperature for December to February was the highest since records began in 1880
World breaks temperature records | Staff and agencies | Friday March 16, 2007 | Guardian Unlimited
The world experienced its warmest period on record during this year's northern hemisphere winter, the US government said today.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration report said the globally averaged combined land and sea surface temperature for December to February was the highest since records began in 1880. ...
The world experienced its warmest period on record during this year's northern hemisphere winter, the US government said today.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration report said the globally averaged combined land and sea surface temperature for December to February was the highest since records began in 1880. ...
John Boehner of Ohio refused to allow it unless Gilchrest would say that humans have not contributed to global warming
Why the right goes nuclear over global warming | Most of the heat is generated by a small number of hard-core ideologues. | March 25, 2007
"Do you think it's been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the Earth is warming because of man-made problems?" Of the respondents, 23% said yes, 77% said no. ... 2,000 UN scientists worldwide, find.. that the certainty on man-made global warming had risen to 90%.
So, the magazine asked the question again last month. The results? Only 13% of Republicans agreed that global warming has been proved. As the evidence for global warming gets stronger, Republicans are actually getting more skeptical. ...
...
How did it get this way? The easy answer is that Republicans are just tools of the energy industry. It's certainly true that many of them are. Leading global warming skeptic Rep. Joe L. Barton (R-Texas), for instance, was the subject of a fascinating story in the Wall Street Journal a couple of years ago. The bottom line is that his relationship to the energy industry is as puppet relates to hand.
...
The truth is more complicated — and more depressing: A small number of hard-core ideologues (some, but not all, industry shills) have led the thinking for the whole conservative movement.
Your typical conservative has little interest in the issue. Of course, neither does the average nonconservative. But we nonconservatives tend to defer to mainstream scientific wisdom. Conservatives defer to a tiny handful of renegade scientists who reject the overwhelming professional consensus.
National Review magazine, with its popular website, is a perfect example. It has a blog dedicated to casting doubt on global warming, or solutions to global warming, or anybody who advocates a solution. Its title is "Planet Gore." The psychology at work here is pretty clear: Your average conservative may not know anything about climate science, but conservatives do know they hate Al Gore. So, hold up Gore as a hate figure and conservatives will let that dictate their thinking on the issue.
Meanwhile, Republicans who do believe in global warming get shunted aside. Nicole Gaudiano of Gannett News Service recently reported that Rep. Wayne Gilchrest asked to be on the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio refused to allow it unless Gilchrest would say that humans have not contributed to global warming. The Maryland Republican refused and was denied a seat.
Reps. Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md.) and Vernon Ehlers (R-Mich.), both research scientists, also were denied seats on the committee. Normally, relevant expertise would be considered an advantage. In this case, it was a disqualification; if the GOP allowed Republican researchers who accept the scientific consensus to sit on a global warming panel, it would kill the party's strategy of making global warming seem to be the pet obsession of Democrats and Hollywood lefties. ...
"Do you think it's been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the Earth is warming because of man-made problems?" Of the respondents, 23% said yes, 77% said no. ... 2,000 UN scientists worldwide, find.. that the certainty on man-made global warming had risen to 90%.
So, the magazine asked the question again last month. The results? Only 13% of Republicans agreed that global warming has been proved. As the evidence for global warming gets stronger, Republicans are actually getting more skeptical. ...
...
How did it get this way? The easy answer is that Republicans are just tools of the energy industry. It's certainly true that many of them are. Leading global warming skeptic Rep. Joe L. Barton (R-Texas), for instance, was the subject of a fascinating story in the Wall Street Journal a couple of years ago. The bottom line is that his relationship to the energy industry is as puppet relates to hand.
...
The truth is more complicated — and more depressing: A small number of hard-core ideologues (some, but not all, industry shills) have led the thinking for the whole conservative movement.
Your typical conservative has little interest in the issue. Of course, neither does the average nonconservative. But we nonconservatives tend to defer to mainstream scientific wisdom. Conservatives defer to a tiny handful of renegade scientists who reject the overwhelming professional consensus.
National Review magazine, with its popular website, is a perfect example. It has a blog dedicated to casting doubt on global warming, or solutions to global warming, or anybody who advocates a solution. Its title is "Planet Gore." The psychology at work here is pretty clear: Your average conservative may not know anything about climate science, but conservatives do know they hate Al Gore. So, hold up Gore as a hate figure and conservatives will let that dictate their thinking on the issue.
Meanwhile, Republicans who do believe in global warming get shunted aside. Nicole Gaudiano of Gannett News Service recently reported that Rep. Wayne Gilchrest asked to be on the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio refused to allow it unless Gilchrest would say that humans have not contributed to global warming. The Maryland Republican refused and was denied a seat.
Reps. Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md.) and Vernon Ehlers (R-Mich.), both research scientists, also were denied seats on the committee. Normally, relevant expertise would be considered an advantage. In this case, it was a disqualification; if the GOP allowed Republican researchers who accept the scientific consensus to sit on a global warming panel, it would kill the party's strategy of making global warming seem to be the pet obsession of Democrats and Hollywood lefties. ...
Rove "ticked off 11 states that he said could be pivotal in 2008" ..."new U.S. attorneys in nine of them since 2005"
Evidence Suggests U.S. Attorney Firings May Have Been Part of White House Scheme to Help Game 2008 Election | Guest Blogged by Arlen Parsa
Karl Rove Associate and GOP Operative Tim Griffin's Appointment in Arkansas --- and Others Like it --- Are Worth Noting as the Scandal Continues to Unravel...
Details continue to drip out from the U.S. Attorney Purge scandal which seem to suggest that electoral politics --- and perhaps the 2008 election in particular --- may well have been at the heart of the White House/Dept. of Justice scheme to strategically place partisan operatives where they might be most useful prior to the next Presidential Election.
One such detail revealed itself on Tuesday March 20th when Senator Mark Pryor (D-AR) appeared on MSNBC's Hardball to discuss the recent purge of several US Attorneys by the Bush Administration. Host Chris Matthews opened the segment by asking Pryor how much he knew about the White House's decision to replace the US Attorney in his state, Bud Cummins, with one of Karl Rove's associates, a partisan operative named Tim Griffin.
...
"Some people have pointed to that, said isn’t that strange, here [the Administration is] putting in a maybe highly-political US Attorney in Hillary Clinton’s backyard... Isn’t that odd right before the Presidential race?" Pryor explained.
The implication was that if Republicans had a partisan prosecutor in Arkansas where the Clintons lived while Bill had served as governor during the 1980s, he would be able to drudge up old political dirt on the couple in time for the 2008 elections.
Pryor was quick to add that he didn't personally subscribe to the theory, but that it was just speculation he had been hearing among political insiders.
But Griffin's nomination wasn't the only one with political and electoral undertones that might not bode well for Democrats in 2008. In fact, a report from the McClatchy Newspaper syndicate last Friday indicated that the Bush Administration has replaced US Attorneys in several key states, just in time for the 2008 Presidential election.
In April 2006, Karl Rove gave a keynote address to the National Lawyers Association, a partisan legal group. "He ticked off 11 states that he said could be pivotal in 2008," McClatchy recalled in their report.
"Bush has appointed new U.S. attorneys in nine of them since 2005."
Incidentally, during the same speech, Rove also acknowledged his friend, Thor Hearne, who had been both General Counsel to the Bush-Cheney 2004 election campaign and also Executive Director of the GOP front group "American Center for Voting Rights" or ACVR, which has engaged in voter suppression efforts via phony propagandistic reports on American's non-existent "voter fraud" epidemic since 2004 (BRAD BLOG's extensive coverage of ACVR can be found here. The group's website has suddenly disappeared since the U.S. Attorney Purge scandal has come to light.)
...
In any event, three of the US Attorneys Bush has nominated since the 2004 election were, remarkably enough, from the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, which has been criticized for implementing policies which unfairly disadvantage poor, often minority voters whose political tendencies historically favor Democrats.
And Griffin himself had allegedly been involved with voter suppression. Griffin, as investigative journalist Greg Palast discovered in 2004, was one of the RNC operatives that had thought up a complicated scheme to disenfranchise Americans who did not respond to letters sent to their home addresses. Victims of the scheme whose votes were thrown away, Palast reported, included homeless people, and black soldiers serving overseas who obviously could not respond to mail, marked with "do not forward" instructions, delivered to their home addresses.
The scheme Griffin played a role in also reportedly targeted predominately African American areas in swing states such as Florida. ...
Karl Rove Associate and GOP Operative Tim Griffin's Appointment in Arkansas --- and Others Like it --- Are Worth Noting as the Scandal Continues to Unravel...
Details continue to drip out from the U.S. Attorney Purge scandal which seem to suggest that electoral politics --- and perhaps the 2008 election in particular --- may well have been at the heart of the White House/Dept. of Justice scheme to strategically place partisan operatives where they might be most useful prior to the next Presidential Election.
One such detail revealed itself on Tuesday March 20th when Senator Mark Pryor (D-AR) appeared on MSNBC's Hardball to discuss the recent purge of several US Attorneys by the Bush Administration. Host Chris Matthews opened the segment by asking Pryor how much he knew about the White House's decision to replace the US Attorney in his state, Bud Cummins, with one of Karl Rove's associates, a partisan operative named Tim Griffin.
...
"Some people have pointed to that, said isn’t that strange, here [the Administration is] putting in a maybe highly-political US Attorney in Hillary Clinton’s backyard... Isn’t that odd right before the Presidential race?" Pryor explained.
The implication was that if Republicans had a partisan prosecutor in Arkansas where the Clintons lived while Bill had served as governor during the 1980s, he would be able to drudge up old political dirt on the couple in time for the 2008 elections.
Pryor was quick to add that he didn't personally subscribe to the theory, but that it was just speculation he had been hearing among political insiders.
But Griffin's nomination wasn't the only one with political and electoral undertones that might not bode well for Democrats in 2008. In fact, a report from the McClatchy Newspaper syndicate last Friday indicated that the Bush Administration has replaced US Attorneys in several key states, just in time for the 2008 Presidential election.
In April 2006, Karl Rove gave a keynote address to the National Lawyers Association, a partisan legal group. "He ticked off 11 states that he said could be pivotal in 2008," McClatchy recalled in their report.
"Bush has appointed new U.S. attorneys in nine of them since 2005."
Incidentally, during the same speech, Rove also acknowledged his friend, Thor Hearne, who had been both General Counsel to the Bush-Cheney 2004 election campaign and also Executive Director of the GOP front group "American Center for Voting Rights" or ACVR, which has engaged in voter suppression efforts via phony propagandistic reports on American's non-existent "voter fraud" epidemic since 2004 (BRAD BLOG's extensive coverage of ACVR can be found here. The group's website has suddenly disappeared since the U.S. Attorney Purge scandal has come to light.)
...
In any event, three of the US Attorneys Bush has nominated since the 2004 election were, remarkably enough, from the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, which has been criticized for implementing policies which unfairly disadvantage poor, often minority voters whose political tendencies historically favor Democrats.
And Griffin himself had allegedly been involved with voter suppression. Griffin, as investigative journalist Greg Palast discovered in 2004, was one of the RNC operatives that had thought up a complicated scheme to disenfranchise Americans who did not respond to letters sent to their home addresses. Victims of the scheme whose votes were thrown away, Palast reported, included homeless people, and black soldiers serving overseas who obviously could not respond to mail, marked with "do not forward" instructions, delivered to their home addresses.
The scheme Griffin played a role in also reportedly targeted predominately African American areas in swing states such as Florida. ...
Monday, March 19, 2007
scientists being muzzled: half the scientists had seen or experienced pressure to delete words like "global warming" from written material
Welch: Interference in science "stunning" | January 31, 2007
BURLINGTON, Vt. --U.S. Rep. Peter Welch says it was a "stunning personal experience" to hear federal scientists say they had been stymied from talking about climate change.
"There was a story about a scientist who got authorized to speak at a conference. He was prohibited from using the phrase 'global warming.' He was allowed to say 'global,' and he could say 'warming,' but he couldn't put them next to each other. It became a charade," Welch said.
The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, on which Welch serves, is holding hearings on the administration's handling of the global warming issue. The panel's chairman, Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., said the administration appeared to want "to mislead the public by injecting doubt into the science of global warming."
Welch said he had read about scientists being muzzled, but, "It's a stunning personal experience to hear directly from scientists whose life work has been compromised, who live in fear of retaliation or compromised careers if they adhere to their code of ethics as scientists."
...
The survey found nearly half the scientists had seen or experienced pressure to delete words like "global warming" from written material. About 40 percent said thad had seen changes to materials that changed their scientific meanings.
The White House maintains it was trying to bring balance to reports on global warming.
BURLINGTON, Vt. --U.S. Rep. Peter Welch says it was a "stunning personal experience" to hear federal scientists say they had been stymied from talking about climate change.
"There was a story about a scientist who got authorized to speak at a conference. He was prohibited from using the phrase 'global warming.' He was allowed to say 'global,' and he could say 'warming,' but he couldn't put them next to each other. It became a charade," Welch said.
The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, on which Welch serves, is holding hearings on the administration's handling of the global warming issue. The panel's chairman, Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., said the administration appeared to want "to mislead the public by injecting doubt into the science of global warming."
Welch said he had read about scientists being muzzled, but, "It's a stunning personal experience to hear directly from scientists whose life work has been compromised, who live in fear of retaliation or compromised careers if they adhere to their code of ethics as scientists."
...
The survey found nearly half the scientists had seen or experienced pressure to delete words like "global warming" from written material. About 40 percent said thad had seen changes to materials that changed their scientific meanings.
The White House maintains it was trying to bring balance to reports on global warming.
Army made video warning about dangers of depleted uranium but never showed it to troops
Army made video warning about dangers of depleted uranium but never showed it to troops | David Edwards | Published: Tuesday February 6, 2007
A special investigation on the effects of depleted uranium reveals the Army made a tape warning of the effects of depleted uranium which was never shown to troops despite the fact the Pentagon knew the agent to be potentially deadly, CNN reports Tuesday.
Depleted uranium -- or DU -- was used in the Gulf War as a projectile that could penetrate tank armor. A group of soldiers are suing the US government because they are sick from exposure; despite the unshown video, the Army denies that depleted uranium represents a serious health risk.
CNN reporter Greg Hunter explains. The soldiers "report similar ailments. Painful urination, headaches and joint pain. They say Army doctors blame their symptoms on post traumatic stress. We showed them a tape the Army made in 1995, a tape the Army never distributed. It warned of potential D.U. hazards. The army's expert on D.U. training concedes some information contained on the tape is true. For instance, radioactive particles can be harmful."
A doctor who once investigated DU for the Army now believes that the health risks are serious.
"In the 1990s this doctor studied D.U. health effects for the U.S. military," Hunter says. "Now a private researcher, he says his own test of these veterans showed abnormally high levels of D.U. this their urine and that those levels pose a serious health threat."
"One doctor... calls it, quote, 'a radiological sewer,'" Hunter adds. "The Army adamantly denies that." ...
A special investigation on the effects of depleted uranium reveals the Army made a tape warning of the effects of depleted uranium which was never shown to troops despite the fact the Pentagon knew the agent to be potentially deadly, CNN reports Tuesday.
Depleted uranium -- or DU -- was used in the Gulf War as a projectile that could penetrate tank armor. A group of soldiers are suing the US government because they are sick from exposure; despite the unshown video, the Army denies that depleted uranium represents a serious health risk.
CNN reporter Greg Hunter explains. The soldiers "report similar ailments. Painful urination, headaches and joint pain. They say Army doctors blame their symptoms on post traumatic stress. We showed them a tape the Army made in 1995, a tape the Army never distributed. It warned of potential D.U. hazards. The army's expert on D.U. training concedes some information contained on the tape is true. For instance, radioactive particles can be harmful."
A doctor who once investigated DU for the Army now believes that the health risks are serious.
"In the 1990s this doctor studied D.U. health effects for the U.S. military," Hunter says. "Now a private researcher, he says his own test of these veterans showed abnormally high levels of D.U. this their urine and that those levels pose a serious health threat."
"One doctor... calls it, quote, 'a radiological sewer,'" Hunter adds. "The Army adamantly denies that." ...
Several former prosecutors have since alleged intimidation, including improper telephone calls from GOP lawmakers
Firings Had Genesis in White House | Ex-Counsel Miers First Suggested Dismissing Prosecutors 2 Years Ago, Documents Show | By Dan Eggen and John Solomon | Washington Post Staff Writers | Tuesday, March 13, 2007; Page A01
The White House suggested two years ago that the Justice Department fire all 93 U.S. attorneys, a proposal that eventually resulted in the dismissals of eight prosecutors last year, according to e-mails and internal documents that the administration will provide to Congress today.
The dismissals took place after President Bush told Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales in October that he had received complaints that some prosecutors had not energetically pursued voter-fraud investigations, according to a White House spokeswoman. ...
...
Seven U.S. attorneys were fired on Dec. 7 and another was fired months earlier, with little explanation from the Justice Department. Several former prosecutors have since alleged intimidation, including improper telephone calls from GOP lawmakers or their aides, and have alleged threats of retaliation by a Justice Department official. ...
The White House suggested two years ago that the Justice Department fire all 93 U.S. attorneys, a proposal that eventually resulted in the dismissals of eight prosecutors last year, according to e-mails and internal documents that the administration will provide to Congress today.
The dismissals took place after President Bush told Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales in October that he had received complaints that some prosecutors had not energetically pursued voter-fraud investigations, according to a White House spokeswoman. ...
...
Seven U.S. attorneys were fired on Dec. 7 and another was fired months earlier, with little explanation from the Justice Department. Several former prosecutors have since alleged intimidation, including improper telephone calls from GOP lawmakers or their aides, and have alleged threats of retaliation by a Justice Department official. ...
Low Pay and Broken Promises Greet Guest Workers in U.S.
February 28, 2007, Wednesday | By STEVEN GREENHOUSE (NYT); National Desk | Late Edition - Final, Section A, Page 1, Column 4, 1679 words
Article on abuse of many of 120,000 foreign workers who receive visasto do farm work or other low-skilled labor in US, usually for three to nine months; accounts of abuse of workers like Thai farmer Worawut Khansamrit, who was never paid what recruiter promised, come as Pres Bush and many in Congress push for immigration overhaul that would expand guest worker program, which grew out of World War II bracero program for Mexicans; abuses include guest workers paying exorbitant fees and getting fewer weeks of work and less pay than promised; several Thai and Indonesian workers describe plight; Khansamrit and 21 other guest workers are suing labor contractors and farmers in North Carolina ...
Article on abuse of many of 120,000 foreign workers who receive visasto do farm work or other low-skilled labor in US, usually for three to nine months; accounts of abuse of workers like Thai farmer Worawut Khansamrit, who was never paid what recruiter promised, come as Pres Bush and many in Congress push for immigration overhaul that would expand guest worker program, which grew out of World War II bracero program for Mexicans; abuses include guest workers paying exorbitant fees and getting fewer weeks of work and less pay than promised; several Thai and Indonesian workers describe plight; Khansamrit and 21 other guest workers are suing labor contractors and farmers in North Carolina ...
Budget Cuts: U.S. wildlife agency cutting 565 jobs, closing refuges [... guns vs. butter?!]
U.S. wildlife agency cutting 565 jobs, closing refuges | The Associated Press | AOT 2007
WASHINGTON - The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service is eliminating hundreds of jobs, cutting back programs and closing some national wildlife refuges as it grapples with a $2.5 billion budget shortfall.
WASHINGTON - The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service is eliminating hundreds of jobs, cutting back programs and closing some national wildlife refuges as it grapples with a $2.5 billion budget shortfall.
Thursday, November 16, 2006
Ex-Quarterback Thrives as Lobbyist ... “first African-American” owner for a John Deere dealership (with a South Korean) ... meanwhile ...
Ex-Quarterback Thrives as Lobbyist | By BARRY MEIER | Published: November 11, 2006
Around the time that the John Deere Company hired the former Oklahoma representative J. C. Watts Jr. as a lobbyist two years ago, it also handed him an important mission.
Mr. Watts, the conservative Republican superstar, was asked to find black businessmen and women to become John Deere dealers after a lawsuit stated that there was not a single one among the roughly 1,400 dealers nationwide that sold its trademark green-and-yellow tractors and riding mowers.
This May, executives at Mr. Watts’s lobbying and consulting firm in Washington announced that after a lengthy search, they had found the “first African-American” owner for a John Deere dealership. That dealer’s name: the J. C. Watts Companies.
“I am proud to join the John Deere team,” Mr. Watts said in a news release about his firm’s purchase of two small dealerships in Texas.
...
Now as a lobbyist, he has shown a similar deftness — as the case of John Deere suggests — for turning his lobbying assignments into business deals for himself and his clients.
As it turns out, for example, Mr. Watts’s principal partner in his Deere dealerships is not African-American, nor is he even an American.
Instead, he is a South Korean businessman who, until recently, was paying Mr. Watts’s firm to help him win construction work at a United States military base in that country.
That businessman, Keum Sang-yeon, did not end up with military work. But he agreed last year to join Mr. Watts in buying the Deere outlets in Texas, putting up $2 million of the $4 million price, an executive of one of his companies said in an interview.
...
John Deere’s search for a black dealer began not long after the company was sued in late 2003 by a retired black employee who had tried to become one.
On paper at least, that former employee, Kenny Edwards, appeared qualified to be a dealer. According to court papers, Mr. Edwards had worked for the equipment maker for 30 years, becoming, before his retirement in 2001, sales director of its division that sells equipment for use on golf courses. An article in a trade magazine, Crittenden GolfInc, credited him with “leading” John Deere to a position of prominence in the golf industry once held by a rival, Toro.
But in his lawsuit, Mr. Edwards claimed that the company had blocked his efforts to buy two lucrative dealerships in Alabama from their owners by making excessive demands, such as requiring him to pledge additional property. Such demands, which Mr. Edwards contended the company did not seek from white dealers, prevented him “from realizing his dream of becoming the first African-American to own a Deere dealership,” his suit stated.
John Deere executives said that they had not discriminated against Mr. Edwards and had done nothing to block the deal. But whatever the case, some black leaders soon put pressure on the equipment maker. ...
Around the time that the John Deere Company hired the former Oklahoma representative J. C. Watts Jr. as a lobbyist two years ago, it also handed him an important mission.
Mr. Watts, the conservative Republican superstar, was asked to find black businessmen and women to become John Deere dealers after a lawsuit stated that there was not a single one among the roughly 1,400 dealers nationwide that sold its trademark green-and-yellow tractors and riding mowers.
This May, executives at Mr. Watts’s lobbying and consulting firm in Washington announced that after a lengthy search, they had found the “first African-American” owner for a John Deere dealership. That dealer’s name: the J. C. Watts Companies.
“I am proud to join the John Deere team,” Mr. Watts said in a news release about his firm’s purchase of two small dealerships in Texas.
...
Now as a lobbyist, he has shown a similar deftness — as the case of John Deere suggests — for turning his lobbying assignments into business deals for himself and his clients.
As it turns out, for example, Mr. Watts’s principal partner in his Deere dealerships is not African-American, nor is he even an American.
Instead, he is a South Korean businessman who, until recently, was paying Mr. Watts’s firm to help him win construction work at a United States military base in that country.
That businessman, Keum Sang-yeon, did not end up with military work. But he agreed last year to join Mr. Watts in buying the Deere outlets in Texas, putting up $2 million of the $4 million price, an executive of one of his companies said in an interview.
...
John Deere’s search for a black dealer began not long after the company was sued in late 2003 by a retired black employee who had tried to become one.
On paper at least, that former employee, Kenny Edwards, appeared qualified to be a dealer. According to court papers, Mr. Edwards had worked for the equipment maker for 30 years, becoming, before his retirement in 2001, sales director of its division that sells equipment for use on golf courses. An article in a trade magazine, Crittenden GolfInc, credited him with “leading” John Deere to a position of prominence in the golf industry once held by a rival, Toro.
But in his lawsuit, Mr. Edwards claimed that the company had blocked his efforts to buy two lucrative dealerships in Alabama from their owners by making excessive demands, such as requiring him to pledge additional property. Such demands, which Mr. Edwards contended the company did not seek from white dealers, prevented him “from realizing his dream of becoming the first African-American to own a Deere dealership,” his suit stated.
John Deere executives said that they had not discriminated against Mr. Edwards and had done nothing to block the deal. But whatever the case, some black leaders soon put pressure on the equipment maker. ...
Saturday, November 11, 2006
new Medicare prescription benefit is proving to be a financial windfall larger than even the most optimistic Wall Street analysts had predicted
As Drug Prices Climb, Democrats Find Fault With Medicare Plan | By ALEX BERENSON
Published: November 6, 2006
For big drug companies, the new Medicare prescription benefit is proving to be a financial windfall larger than even the most optimistic Wall Street analysts had predicted.
But those gains may come back to haunt drug makers if Democrats take control of Congress this week.
Democrats, who have long charged that the drug industry is profiteering at taxpayers’ expense, say they want to introduce legislation to revoke the law that bars Medicare from negotiating prices directly with drug makers like Pfizer for the medicines it buys.
Medicare now pays for drugs indirectly, through the private insurers that administer the prescription program — and those insurers typically pay higher prices than government agencies, like the Veterans Administration, that buy medicines directly from drug makers.
The government is expected to spend at least $31 billion this year on the drug benefit, which provides partial drug coverage for people over age 65, according to the federal agency that runs Medicare. Next year, the program is expected to cost almost $50 billion — almost 20 percent of overall American drug spending. ...
Published: November 6, 2006
For big drug companies, the new Medicare prescription benefit is proving to be a financial windfall larger than even the most optimistic Wall Street analysts had predicted.
But those gains may come back to haunt drug makers if Democrats take control of Congress this week.
Democrats, who have long charged that the drug industry is profiteering at taxpayers’ expense, say they want to introduce legislation to revoke the law that bars Medicare from negotiating prices directly with drug makers like Pfizer for the medicines it buys.
Medicare now pays for drugs indirectly, through the private insurers that administer the prescription program — and those insurers typically pay higher prices than government agencies, like the Veterans Administration, that buy medicines directly from drug makers.
The government is expected to spend at least $31 billion this year on the drug benefit, which provides partial drug coverage for people over age 65, according to the federal agency that runs Medicare. Next year, the program is expected to cost almost $50 billion — almost 20 percent of overall American drug spending. ...
Monday, November 06, 2006
Republican majority ...has wrecked the budget, hobbled the middle class and endangered the long-term economy, ignored global warming, foreign oil ...
Editorial | The Difference Two Years Made | Published: November 5, 2006
On Tuesday, when this page runs the list of people it has endorsed for election, we will include no Republican Congressional candidates for the first time in our memory. Although Times editorials tend to agree with Democrats on national policy, we have proudly and consistently endorsed a long line of moderate Republicans, particularly for the House. Our only political loyalty is to making the two-party system as vital and responsible as possible.
That is why things are different this year.
To begin with, the Republican majority that has run the House — and for the most part, the Senate — during President Bush’s tenure has done a terrible job on the basics. Its tax-cutting-above-all-else has wrecked the budget, hobbled the middle class and endangered the long-term economy. It has refused to face up to global warming and done pathetically little about the country’s dependence on foreign oil.
Republican leaders, particularly in the House, have developed toxic symptoms of an overconfident majority that has been too long in power. They methodically shut the opposition — and even the more moderate members of their own party — out of any role in the legislative process. Their only mission seems to be self-perpetuation.
The current Republican majority managed to achieve that burned-out, brain-dead status in record time, and with a shocking disregard for the most minimal ethical standards. It was bad enough that a party that used to believe in fiscal austerity blew billions on pork-barrel projects. It is worse that many of the most expensive boondoggles were not even directed at their constituents, but at lobbyists who financed their campaigns and high-end lifestyles. ...
On Tuesday, when this page runs the list of people it has endorsed for election, we will include no Republican Congressional candidates for the first time in our memory. Although Times editorials tend to agree with Democrats on national policy, we have proudly and consistently endorsed a long line of moderate Republicans, particularly for the House. Our only political loyalty is to making the two-party system as vital and responsible as possible.
That is why things are different this year.
To begin with, the Republican majority that has run the House — and for the most part, the Senate — during President Bush’s tenure has done a terrible job on the basics. Its tax-cutting-above-all-else has wrecked the budget, hobbled the middle class and endangered the long-term economy. It has refused to face up to global warming and done pathetically little about the country’s dependence on foreign oil.
Republican leaders, particularly in the House, have developed toxic symptoms of an overconfident majority that has been too long in power. They methodically shut the opposition — and even the more moderate members of their own party — out of any role in the legislative process. Their only mission seems to be self-perpetuation.
The current Republican majority managed to achieve that burned-out, brain-dead status in record time, and with a shocking disregard for the most minimal ethical standards. It was bad enough that a party that used to believe in fiscal austerity blew billions on pork-barrel projects. It is worse that many of the most expensive boondoggles were not even directed at their constituents, but at lobbyists who financed their campaigns and high-end lifestyles. ...
Saturday, November 04, 2006
Convicted Republican Ney resigns from House ... fourth House Republican to step down under pressure in the 109th Congress
Convicted Republican Ney resigns from House | Email this Story | Nov 3, 7:50 PM (ET) | By Thomas Ferraro
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican Bob Ney of Ohio resigned from the U.S. House of Representatives on Friday, three weeks after pleading guilty in the Jack Abramoff political corruption scandal.
Ney submitted a letter of resignation, effective immediately, to House Speaker Dennis Hastert, an Illinois Republican who along with other lawmakers had urged him to step down immediately.
Ney had said in August he would not seek re-election to a seventh two-year term in the November 7 elections.
By staying on for a bit longer, he remained eligible to receive his paycheck and benefits, which drew widespread criticism.
Ney was the first lawmaker convicted in the Abramoff influence-peddling scandal, and the fourth House Republican to step down under pressure in the 109th Congress.
Their cases have rocked Republicans as they seek to retain control of the House on Tuesday. Democrats have accused Republicans of "a culture of corruption." ...
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican Bob Ney of Ohio resigned from the U.S. House of Representatives on Friday, three weeks after pleading guilty in the Jack Abramoff political corruption scandal.
Ney submitted a letter of resignation, effective immediately, to House Speaker Dennis Hastert, an Illinois Republican who along with other lawmakers had urged him to step down immediately.
Ney had said in August he would not seek re-election to a seventh two-year term in the November 7 elections.
By staying on for a bit longer, he remained eligible to receive his paycheck and benefits, which drew widespread criticism.
Ney was the first lawmaker convicted in the Abramoff influence-peddling scandal, and the fourth House Republican to step down under pressure in the 109th Congress.
Their cases have rocked Republicans as they seek to retain control of the House on Tuesday. Democrats have accused Republicans of "a culture of corruption." ...
Saturday, October 28, 2006
The real fraud is the theft of our democracy, by deliberate suppression of the right to vote and to have one's vote counted
Hampering the vote | By Robert Kuttner | October 28, 2006
POLLS SHOW Democrats picking up between 20 and 30 House seats, enough to take control of the House. But brace yourself for a very long evening -- that could go on for days.
The Republicans' superior ground operation -- they spend more on targeting voters and getting out the vote -- has received some attention in the press. But far more ominous is the organized effort to suppress voter turnout, directed entirely against groups likely to vote for Democrats.
An exhaustive report, "Voting in 2006: Have We Solved the Problems of 2004?" by the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the Century Foundation, and Common Cause, catalogs new, sickening assaults on our democracy:
Hurdles to voter registration. Several states, led predictably by Florida and Ohio, have added criminal penalties for voter-registration efforts that violate deliberately complicated rules . In Florida, the Legislature added fines for nonpartisan groups that turn in registration materials late. This put League of Women Voters volunteer efforts in many minority areas out of business.
The Republicans' superior ground operation -- they spend more on targeting voters and getting out the vote -- has received some attention in the press. But far more ominous is the organized effort to suppress voter turnout, directed entirely against groups likely to vote for Democrats.
An exhaustive report, "Voting in 2006: Have We Solved the Problems of 2004?" by the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the Century Foundation, and Common Cause, catalogs new, sickening assaults on our democracy:
Hurdles to voter registration. Several states, led predictably by Florida and Ohio, have added criminal penalties for voter-registration efforts that violate deliberately complicated rules . In Florida, the Legislature added fines for nonpartisan groups that turn in registration materials late. This put League of Women Voters volunteer efforts in many minority areas out of business.
In Ohio, where the notorious secretary of state, Ken Blackwell, is also the Republican candidate for governor, technical violations of complex voter-registration laws are now felonies. Republicans even tried to disqualify Blackwell's opponent, Ted Strickland, from running, on the ground that he had voted in past years from two different Ohio addresses (where he lived).
Excessive ID requirements. In states that require voter ID, common-sense documentation such as a utility bill or tax receipt has long been accepted. Other states have accepted a signed affidavit or signature match, and experienced no fraud problems. But in several Republican-controlled states, such as Florida, Georgia, and Missouri, photo-ID requirements have been added, disqualifying people -- mostly poor, elderly, minority (and likely to vote for Democrats) -- who lack driver's licenses or passports or special voter cards. In Florida, the requirement could disqualify 300,000 voters.
Impediments to voting. In Arizona, an anti-immigrant ballot initiative passed in 2004 requires voters to bring proof of citizenship. In the first two months after the initiative passed, 70 percent of voter-registration applications in Maricopa County (Phoenix) were rejected for lack of adequate documentation. In Ohio, where voters in heavily Democratic and minority precincts waited for as long as 10 hours and countless gave up because of mysterious shortages of voting machines, the state belatedly required roughly equal allocation of voting machines. This remedy takes effect in 2013!
...
Republicans defend these vote-suppression measures as necessary to combat fraud. Once, big-city Democratic machines made sure people voted "early and often." But the right has been unable to produce evidence of deliberate ballot fraud today.
In Washington State, where Democrat Christine Gregoire won the governorship in 2004 by 133 votes, Republican litigators spent millions seeking improperly cast ballots. All they found were exactly five former felons who had unintentionally neglected the paperwork necessary to restore their franchise.
The real fraud is the theft of our democracy, by deliberate suppression of the right to vote and to have one's vote counted. ...Investigators Say Speaker’s Aide Hindered Inquiry of Hill Security Contracts
Two former House committee investigators who were examining Capitol Hill security upgrades said a senior aide to Speaker
The former Appropriations Committee investigators said Ted Van Der Meid, Hastert’s chief counsel, resisted from the start the inquiry, which began with concerns about mismanagement of a secret security office and later probed allegations of bid-rigging and kickbacks from contractors to a Defense Department employee.
Ronald Garant and a second Appropriations Committee investigator who asked not to be identified said Van Der Meid engaged in “screaming matches” with investigators and told at least one aide not to talk to them. Van Der Meid also prohibited investigators from visiting certain sites to check up on the effectiveness of the work, the investigators said.
Van Der Meid oversaw Capitol security upgrades for Hastert, R-Ill., and worked closely with the office that was charged with implementing them, the investigators said.
K. Lee Blalack, a lawyer for Van Der Meid, said Friday that neither he nor Van Der Meid would comment on the matter.
John Scofield, a spokesman for the Appropriations Committee, said the former investigators were taken off of the investigation, but denied that it was terminated. ...
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
Blackwell purged Ohio Voter Rolls Oct 1st.- I am going to assume purge went to no-one registered GOP
ACTION ALERT: Blackwell purged Ohio Voter Rolls Oct 1st.- Vote Early. | by KStreetProjector | Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 05:59:14 AM PDT
A friend, in a position to be present at lunches of GOP insiders here in DC called me on Thursday, they know of my ongoing efforts to make hackable voting end.
My friend was present as a group of Moderate GOP members with Ohio ties lamented how far the party had strayed. There was consensus at the table there was no way they should retain control. The table conversation began with the assumption they party would lose control in this election. The moderates started planning how to take back control of the GOP from the extremists.
Then, one insider, probably an extremist, but certainly very close to Mr. Ken Mehlman abruptly stopped the conversation. He told table that it was impossible they would lose either house. He also predicts an Ohio GOP sweep.
He informed the group that over the last year, in four critical states the GOP needs to hold huge purges of the voter rolls have just been finished.
The insider did not say which four states, but did say Ohio was among them.
His claim was a new Diebold voter registry system had been installed over the last year. The last week of July and the first week of August a "test run" was made of the systems ability to purge ineligable voters. The purge generated names and test letters sent out to 1.2 million Ohio addresses with a focus on University's, Apartment addresses with high turnover. He claims they made the letters seem just functionary, but they have an action component to avoid being purged from the rolls.
The Insider warmed and said that Blackwell was brilliant in how he did this. The letter went on for a long time about changes in Ohio voting and security and suggested people who might have any concerns about their voting status could come by county offices and confirm their continued voting eligability before election day.
He further added, that since it was conducted as a "test" they only sent letters to a limited number of suspect addresses and "I suspect Blackwell chose criteria very very favorable for us."
Further the insider stated that Blackwell had only purged the lists after a full 60 days was given for people to respond. Which means even if a voter was on the "termination" list, they would still have been eligable to vote in the primary.
He told they table they believe the purge has probably caught up "hundreds of thousands of students, activists and wanderers with no real job" would show up at the polls and have to vote provisionally.
He predicted to the table that tens of thousands of voters will show up on election day, and once the provisionals are used up will simply not be able to at all.
He also said that this "operation" (The Insiders word, my friend was specific about this" had turned up a lot of additional fascinating information including a number of Democrats in elected office who are registered to vote in several places, and they may explore how to use this information against them.
I am going to assume, Mr. Blackwell's "test" purge went to no-one registered GOP. His criteria is something I am trying to get a copy of now.
Monday, October 16, 2006
probe will attempt to determine if Weldon used his influence to help secure $1 million in contracts for his lobbyist daughter
CNN confirms DOJ probing Rep. Curt Weldon | David Edwards | Published: Monday October 16, 2006
Rep. Curt Weldon (R-PA) is being investigated by the Bush Administration's Department of Justice, CNN has confirmed with two sources on Capitol Hill.
The probe will attempt to determine if Weldon used his influence to help secure $1 million in contracts for his lobbyist daughter, Karen Weldon.
Rep. Curt Weldon (R-PA) is being investigated by the Bush Administration's Department of Justice, CNN has confirmed with two sources on Capitol Hill.
The probe will attempt to determine if Weldon used his influence to help secure $1 million in contracts for his lobbyist daughter, Karen Weldon.
Saturday, October 14, 2006
The U.S. Congress has made a mockery of democracy with this incumbent protection racket
Thomas J. DiLorenzo: Our monopoly government | The Examiner | Oct 13, 2006 4:00 AM (19 hrs ago)
BALTIMORE - If the Sherman Antitrust Act applied to government, almost every member of the U.S. Congress would face millions in fines and possibly jail time. That’s because the U.S. Congress is a monopolist par excellence.
Consider the U.S. House of Representatives, where 99 percent of incumbents won re-election in 2004; 98 percent in 2000; and 96 percent in 1990. It’s been that way for at least the past four decades with a few brief exceptions, such as the 1994 “Republican Revolution.”
Politicians have created virtually insurmountable “barriers to entry” (to borrow a phrase from economics) that all but guarantee lifetime tenure to anyone elected to Congress ...
...
What are the barriers to entry? First, the 17,000 staffers for the 535 members of Congress — compare this figure to about 1,000 employees who assist the 650 members of the British Parliament. This army of “Hill Rats,” as they are called on Capitol Hill, constitutes a taxpayer-financed, full-time public relations/campaign staff for incumbents. Most challengers, by contrast, rely on unpaid, amateur volunteers (Sen. Barbara Mikulski employs 53 staffers, whereas Sen. Paul Sarbanes employs 44 of them).
In theory, staffers help to craft legislation. In reality, they spend most of their time campaigning for their boss’s re-election. Campaign managers are routinely picked from a congressman’s staff. ...
...
Then there’s the “franking privilege,” a euphemism for taxpayer-financed postage for incumbent campaign mailings. By law, there can be no spending limits on postage for congressional mailings.
The proliferation of committees and subcommittees constitutes an even higher barrier to political competition. The main function of committees and subcommittees is to distribute “pork,” not to carefully contemplate legislation. A member of congress from an agricultural region will want to sit on as many farm committees and subcommittees as possible, for example, in order to direct congressional farm pork to his constituents. A member from the city, on the other hand, will want to sit on all the “urban affairs” subcommittees for the same reason. Mikulski sits on 15 committees; Sarbanes is on eight.
...
The Department of Homeland Security has become a fountain of congressional pork-barrel spending, and is subsequently “supervised” by no fewer than 13 committees and 60 subcommittees. The DHS has been distributing so much pork that state and local governments can’t even spend it all.
North Carolina reportedly spent only about 30 percent of its homeland security money in a recent year, according to Professor James Bennett of George Mason University, author of the new book, “Homeland Security Scams.” Dick Cheney’s home state of Wyoming is probably the last place in America any terrorist would want to target, but it receives more DHS money per capita than any other state, according to Professor Bennett.
The U.S. Congress has made a mockery of democracy with this incumbent protection racket.
The only hope for a return to some semblance of real democracy — and genuine political competition or “federalism,” as the founding fathers called it — is in a massive devolution of power from Washington to the state and local levels, similar to what exists today in Switzerland. What is needed, in other words, is a second American revolution (a peaceful one this time) that would allow us to return to Jefferson’s vision of small and decentralized government. That’s the only way that Americans will ever be the masters, rather than the servants, of their own government.
Thomas J. DiLorenzo is professor of economics at Loyola College and author of “How Capitalism Saved America” (Crown Forum/Random House).
BALTIMORE - If the Sherman Antitrust Act applied to government, almost every member of the U.S. Congress would face millions in fines and possibly jail time. That’s because the U.S. Congress is a monopolist par excellence.
Consider the U.S. House of Representatives, where 99 percent of incumbents won re-election in 2004; 98 percent in 2000; and 96 percent in 1990. It’s been that way for at least the past four decades with a few brief exceptions, such as the 1994 “Republican Revolution.”
Politicians have created virtually insurmountable “barriers to entry” (to borrow a phrase from economics) that all but guarantee lifetime tenure to anyone elected to Congress ...
...
What are the barriers to entry? First, the 17,000 staffers for the 535 members of Congress — compare this figure to about 1,000 employees who assist the 650 members of the British Parliament. This army of “Hill Rats,” as they are called on Capitol Hill, constitutes a taxpayer-financed, full-time public relations/campaign staff for incumbents. Most challengers, by contrast, rely on unpaid, amateur volunteers (Sen. Barbara Mikulski employs 53 staffers, whereas Sen. Paul Sarbanes employs 44 of them).
In theory, staffers help to craft legislation. In reality, they spend most of their time campaigning for their boss’s re-election. Campaign managers are routinely picked from a congressman’s staff. ...
...
Then there’s the “franking privilege,” a euphemism for taxpayer-financed postage for incumbent campaign mailings. By law, there can be no spending limits on postage for congressional mailings.
The proliferation of committees and subcommittees constitutes an even higher barrier to political competition. The main function of committees and subcommittees is to distribute “pork,” not to carefully contemplate legislation. A member of congress from an agricultural region will want to sit on as many farm committees and subcommittees as possible, for example, in order to direct congressional farm pork to his constituents. A member from the city, on the other hand, will want to sit on all the “urban affairs” subcommittees for the same reason. Mikulski sits on 15 committees; Sarbanes is on eight.
...
The Department of Homeland Security has become a fountain of congressional pork-barrel spending, and is subsequently “supervised” by no fewer than 13 committees and 60 subcommittees. The DHS has been distributing so much pork that state and local governments can’t even spend it all.
North Carolina reportedly spent only about 30 percent of its homeland security money in a recent year, according to Professor James Bennett of George Mason University, author of the new book, “Homeland Security Scams.” Dick Cheney’s home state of Wyoming is probably the last place in America any terrorist would want to target, but it receives more DHS money per capita than any other state, according to Professor Bennett.
The U.S. Congress has made a mockery of democracy with this incumbent protection racket.
The only hope for a return to some semblance of real democracy — and genuine political competition or “federalism,” as the founding fathers called it — is in a massive devolution of power from Washington to the state and local levels, similar to what exists today in Switzerland. What is needed, in other words, is a second American revolution (a peaceful one this time) that would allow us to return to Jefferson’s vision of small and decentralized government. That’s the only way that Americans will ever be the masters, rather than the servants, of their own government.
Thomas J. DiLorenzo is professor of economics at Loyola College and author of “How Capitalism Saved America” (Crown Forum/Random House).
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
The only surprise in Washington now is that the Congressional Republicans managed to reach that point of decayed purpose so thoroughly, so fast.
The Foley Matter | Published: October 3, 2006
History suggests that once a political party achieves sweeping power, it will only be a matter of time before the power becomes the entire point. Policy, ideology, ethics all gradually fall away, replaced by a political machine that exists to win elections and dispense the goodies that come as a result. The only surprise in Washington now is that the Congressional Republicans managed to reach that point of decayed purpose so thoroughly, so fast.
That House leaders knew Representative Mark Foley had been sending inappropriate e-mail to Capitol pages and did little about it is terrible. It is also the latest in a long, depressing pattern: When there is a choice between the right thing to do and the easiest route to perpetuation of power, top Republicans always pick wrong.
The news about Mr. Foley should have set off alarm bells instantly, even if the messages the leaders saw were of the “inappropriate” variety rather than the flat-out salacious versions that surfaced last week. But there was certainly no sense of urgency in their response, which seemed directed at sweeping the matter under the rug rather than finding out precisely what was going on.
The obvious first step — notifying the bipartisan committee that oversees the page program — was never taken, presumably because that would have meant bringing a Democrat into the discussions. After Mr. Foley assured everyone that he was simply engaged in mentoring, whatever leadership inquiry there was ended with telling him to stop e-mailing the youth who got the inappropriate letter.
It’s astonishing behavior for a party that sold itself as the champion of conservative social values. But then so was the fact that a party that prides itself on fiscal conservatism managed to roll up record-breaking deficits, featuring large amounts of wasteful pork earmarked to the districts of powerful legislators or the profit sheets of generous campaign contributors. So was the speed with which the party that billed itself as the voice of grass-roots exurban and suburban America turned itself into the partner of every special-interest lobbyist with a checkbook. ...
History suggests that once a political party achieves sweeping power, it will only be a matter of time before the power becomes the entire point. Policy, ideology, ethics all gradually fall away, replaced by a political machine that exists to win elections and dispense the goodies that come as a result. The only surprise in Washington now is that the Congressional Republicans managed to reach that point of decayed purpose so thoroughly, so fast.
That House leaders knew Representative Mark Foley had been sending inappropriate e-mail to Capitol pages and did little about it is terrible. It is also the latest in a long, depressing pattern: When there is a choice between the right thing to do and the easiest route to perpetuation of power, top Republicans always pick wrong.
The news about Mr. Foley should have set off alarm bells instantly, even if the messages the leaders saw were of the “inappropriate” variety rather than the flat-out salacious versions that surfaced last week. But there was certainly no sense of urgency in their response, which seemed directed at sweeping the matter under the rug rather than finding out precisely what was going on.
The obvious first step — notifying the bipartisan committee that oversees the page program — was never taken, presumably because that would have meant bringing a Democrat into the discussions. After Mr. Foley assured everyone that he was simply engaged in mentoring, whatever leadership inquiry there was ended with telling him to stop e-mailing the youth who got the inappropriate letter.
It’s astonishing behavior for a party that sold itself as the champion of conservative social values. But then so was the fact that a party that prides itself on fiscal conservatism managed to roll up record-breaking deficits, featuring large amounts of wasteful pork earmarked to the districts of powerful legislators or the profit sheets of generous campaign contributors. So was the speed with which the party that billed itself as the voice of grass-roots exurban and suburban America turned itself into the partner of every special-interest lobbyist with a checkbook. ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)