GOP Blocks Measures Boosting Taxes on Oil Companies' Profits: "Provisions Passed by Senate Would Raise About $5 Billion | By Jonathan Weisman | Washington Post Staff Writer | Wednesday, April 26, 2006; Page A06
While Republican leaders sharply criticize soaring gasoline prices and energy industry profits, GOP negotiators have decided to knock out provisions in a major tax bill that would force the oil companies to pay billions of dollars more in taxes on their profits.
House and Senate tax writers have been struggling to reach an accord on separate tax bills approved last year to extend some expiring tax cuts enacted during President Bush's first term. But House Republicans have raised strong objections to Senate-passed provisions that would raise nearly $5 billion in taxes over five years -- primarily by changing arcane accounting rules that have allowed oil companies to substantially lower their tax bills, according to House and Senate tax aides familiar with the talks." ...
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
Eighteen families paying millions to kill estate tax
The Raw Story | Eighteen families paying millions to kill estate tax: "RAW STORY | Published: Wednesday April 26, 2006
Eighteen of America's wealthiest families, including the Timkens of Canton, are bankrolling efforts to permanently repeal estate taxes that would save their families a total of $71.6 billion, according to a report released Tuesday by public interest groups, the (information-restricted) Cleveland Plain Dealer reports. Excerpts:"
Eighteen of America's wealthiest families, including the Timkens of Canton, are bankrolling efforts to permanently repeal estate taxes that would save their families a total of $71.6 billion, according to a report released Tuesday by public interest groups, the (information-restricted) Cleveland Plain Dealer reports. Excerpts:"
Groups funded by the super-rich have engaged in a deceptive campaign to convince the public that estate taxes cause widespread problems for small businesses and family farms when they actually affect about one in 370 estates, said the report released by Public Citizen and Boston-based United for a Fair Economy.
Groups that support estate tax repeal say they're close to getting the 60 votes they need in the Senate. Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform says 68 percent of Americans want the tax eliminated. He says estate taxes affect a broad range of people and dismissed the report's contention that it only affects the super rich as "tired rhetoric of hate and envy."
They said families including those that founded Wal-Mart, Gallo wineries, Nordstrom's department stores, Wegman's grocery stores, the Mars candy company, Cox media chain and Campbell Soup Co. joined the Timkens in bankrolling an effort the groups' report called "one of the biggest con jobs in recent history."
Sunday, April 23, 2006
VA Contracts Go to Ex-Chief's Company - Los Angeles Times
VA Contracts Go to Ex-Chief's Company - Los Angeles Times: "By Walter F. Roche Jr., Times Staff Writer | April 23, 2006
Anthony J. Principi has held key positions at the Diamond Bar medical firm before and after heading the agency. Fees could exceed $1 billion.
WASHINGTON — A Diamond Bar company headed by former Veterans Affairs Secretary Anthony J. Principi could get fees exceeding $1 billion from the VA, much of it on contracts approved and amended while he ran the agency, records show.
Principi was president of the medical services company QTC Management Inc. before he joined President Bush's Cabinet in 2001. He ran the VA for four years, then returned to the firm as chairman of the board.
While he was VA secretary, Principi's past and future corporate home collected about $246 million in fees, according to VA records. Congressional Budget Office projections show the contracts could be worth as much as $1.2 billion through 2008.
Principi said he had no role in awarding, amending or administering VA contracts with QTC. ...
Anthony J. Principi has held key positions at the Diamond Bar medical firm before and after heading the agency. Fees could exceed $1 billion.
WASHINGTON — A Diamond Bar company headed by former Veterans Affairs Secretary Anthony J. Principi could get fees exceeding $1 billion from the VA, much of it on contracts approved and amended while he ran the agency, records show.
Principi was president of the medical services company QTC Management Inc. before he joined President Bush's Cabinet in 2001. He ran the VA for four years, then returned to the firm as chairman of the board.
While he was VA secretary, Principi's past and future corporate home collected about $246 million in fees, according to VA records. Congressional Budget Office projections show the contracts could be worth as much as $1.2 billion through 2008.
Principi said he had no role in awarding, amending or administering VA contracts with QTC. ...
Thursday, April 20, 2006
Daily Kos: Roberts called out on delaying Phase II again; Whines and spins in response
Daily Kos: Roberts called out on delaying Phase II again; Whines and spins in response: "by joc | Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 02:20:55 AM PDT
Senator Roberts of Kansas, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in 2004 that he would begin Phase II of the investigation into the pre-war 'intelligence' about the mythical Iraqi weapons of mass destruction shortly after the elections were over. The reason for that delay was that it wouldn't be good to have the hearings hurt by partisans trying to use them for political gain during the election process. Of course, keeping the report under wraps was a political plus for the Repubicans..."
Senator Roberts of Kansas, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in 2004 that he would begin Phase II of the investigation into the pre-war 'intelligence' about the mythical Iraqi weapons of mass destruction shortly after the elections were over. The reason for that delay was that it wouldn't be good to have the hearings hurt by partisans trying to use them for political gain during the election process. Of course, keeping the report under wraps was a political plus for the Repubicans..."
As soon as the elections were over Senator Roberts came to the conclusion that Phase II was no longer necessary, since the American people had elected Bush. However, the abysmal job this Administration has been doing in Iraq has brought the pressure back, and Senator Roberts has been forced to shift his stance from 'no longer necessary' to 'when we can find the time.'
In today's NYT, Senator Roberts has a whiny letter to the editor, crying about how mean and impatient the Times is being.
There is no evidence that the White House manipulated intelligence to exaggerate the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's regime. The Senate Intelligence Committee pointed out in its 511-page report, which 17 Democrats and Republicans unanimously approved, that the intelligence assessments in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction were very declarative.For instance, the N.I.E. said, "Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons." Such forward-leaning assessments were prevalent in the N.I.E. Only later, through the committee's review, did we learn that these assessments were not supported by the underlying intelligence and were the result of flawed tradecraft and sloppy analysis.
With respect to alleged Republican foot-dragging on the phase II reports: on April 5, I announced that after the Easter recess, the committee will hold a series of closed meetings to move forward on phase II, including committee approval of factual findings and conclusions concerning three of the report's five elements. These findings will be fact-based and thorough. They will not be based upon agenda-driven and innuendo-laced press reports. ...
Tuesday, April 18, 2006
DeLay's war chest: raised nearly $500,000 in the six weeks before announcing his resignation
Chron.com | DeLay's war chest grows to $1.4 million: "April 18, 2006, 12:43PM | By MICHAEL HEDGES | Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau
He raised nearly $500,000 in the six weeks before announcing his resignation
WASHINGTON - U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay raised campaign money at a relatively high rate in the six weeks before revealing that he planned to give up his congressional seat, according to disclosures made available Monday.
The $484,475 received by his campaign from Feb. 15 to March 31 helped bring his total cash reserve to $1.4 million, which can be used for legal expenses or political activities." ...
He raised nearly $500,000 in the six weeks before announcing his resignation
WASHINGTON - U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay raised campaign money at a relatively high rate in the six weeks before revealing that he planned to give up his congressional seat, according to disclosures made available Monday.
The $484,475 received by his campaign from Feb. 15 to March 31 helped bring his total cash reserve to $1.4 million, which can be used for legal expenses or political activities." ...
War Bill Includes Millions to Move Just-Rebuilt Line: "... turn this tragedy into a giveaway for economic developers."
Mississippi Senators' Rail Plan Challenged: "By Jonathan Weisman | Washington Post Staff Writer | Tuesday, April 18, 2006; Page A01
War Bill Includes Millions to Move Just-Rebuilt Line
Mississippi's two U.S. senators included $700 million in an emergency war spending bill to relocate a Gulf Coast rail line that has already been rebuilt after Hurricane Katrina at a cost of at least $250 million."
Republican Sens. Trent Lott and Thad Cochran, who have the backing of their state's economic development agencies and tourism industry, say the CSX freight line must be moved to save it from the next hurricane and to protect Mississippi's growing coastal population from rail accidents. But critics of the measure call it a gift to coastal developers and the casino industry that would be paid for with money carved out of tight Katrina relief funds and piggybacked onto funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
War Bill Includes Millions to Move Just-Rebuilt Line
Mississippi's two U.S. senators included $700 million in an emergency war spending bill to relocate a Gulf Coast rail line that has already been rebuilt after Hurricane Katrina at a cost of at least $250 million."
Republican Sens. Trent Lott and Thad Cochran, who have the backing of their state's economic development agencies and tourism industry, say the CSX freight line must be moved to save it from the next hurricane and to protect Mississippi's growing coastal population from rail accidents. But critics of the measure call it a gift to coastal developers and the casino industry that would be paid for with money carved out of tight Katrina relief funds and piggybacked onto funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
"It is ludicrous for the Senate to spend $700 million to destroy and relocate a rail line that is in perfect working order, particularly when it recently underwent a $250 million repair," said Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), who is planning to challenge the funding ... "it is wrong for senators to turn this tragedy into a giveaway for economic developers."
Securing money for pet home-state projects is nothing new for Lott, a famous benefactor of the Mississippi coastline, or for Cochran, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. ...Wednesday, April 12, 2006
9 in 10 showed that the best drug was the one made by the company funding the study ...
Comparison of Schizophrenia Drugs Often Favors Firm Funding Study: "By Shankar Vedantam | Washington Post Staff Writer | Wednesday, April 12, 2006; Page A01
Pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly and Co. recently funded five studies that compared its antipsychotic drug Zyprexa with Risperdal, a competing drug made by Janssen. All five showed Zyprexa was superior in treating schizophrenia.
But when Janssen sponsored its own studies comparing the two drugs, Risperdal came out ahead in three out of four.
...
In fact, when psychiatrist John Davis analyzed every publicly available trial funded by the pharmaceutical industry pitting five new antipsychotic drugs against one another, nine in 10 showed that the best drug was the one made by the company funding the study.
...
By contrast, when the federal government recently compared a broader range of drugs in typical schizophrenia patients in a lengthy trial, two medications that stood out were cheaper drugs not under patent ...
...
"A perfectly independent agency has to be set up that says, 'Here are the areas where trials must be done,' " said Drummond Rennie, deputy editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association. "There will be two classes of trials -- the believable ones and the non-believable ones."
...
But several experts say industry-sponsored trials are failing to answer the questions doctors really need answered: Which drug works best for which patient? Are differences in drugs worth the differences in cost? How many patients are likely to recover entirely, rather than just show progress in the right direction? ...
Pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly and Co. recently funded five studies that compared its antipsychotic drug Zyprexa with Risperdal, a competing drug made by Janssen. All five showed Zyprexa was superior in treating schizophrenia.
But when Janssen sponsored its own studies comparing the two drugs, Risperdal came out ahead in three out of four.
...
In fact, when psychiatrist John Davis analyzed every publicly available trial funded by the pharmaceutical industry pitting five new antipsychotic drugs against one another, nine in 10 showed that the best drug was the one made by the company funding the study.
...
By contrast, when the federal government recently compared a broader range of drugs in typical schizophrenia patients in a lengthy trial, two medications that stood out were cheaper drugs not under patent ...
...
"A perfectly independent agency has to be set up that says, 'Here are the areas where trials must be done,' " said Drummond Rennie, deputy editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association. "There will be two classes of trials -- the believable ones and the non-believable ones."
...
But several experts say industry-sponsored trials are failing to answer the questions doctors really need answered: Which drug works best for which patient? Are differences in drugs worth the differences in cost? How many patients are likely to recover entirely, rather than just show progress in the right direction? ...
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
one-third of [Iraq 1 veterans] now receive disability compensation
Iraq Mess is Literally Making People Sick :: from www.uruknet.info :: news from occupied Iraq - ch: "Judy Leurquin" | April 10, 2006
Of the more than 670,000 troops deployed to the Gulf in 1991, about one-third of them now receive disability compensation.Remember your mother's warning, "If you can't clean up after yourself, don't make the mess"? Didn't we subject our children to that mantra?
Take Iraq, for example. During the 1991 Gulf War our military attacked Iraq and its people with over 350 tons of depleted uranium (DU). During the current war and occupation we've fired 2,200-plus tons on people and cities all over Iraq. A byproduct of uranium enrichment, DU remains radioactive for 4.5 billion years. We have turned the cradle of civilization into a toxic wasteland.
DU is cheap. Nuclear power plants are glad to have arms manufacturers take this radioactive waste material off their hands. DU is effective, 1.7 times denser than lead. It's pyrophoric, burning everything it hits into a charred crisp.
When DU weapons strike targets, a fine aerosol of uranium oxide is formed, which can be inhaled. Inhaled particles can cause serious damage, especially the insoluble particles that can remain in the body a long time. DU is an alpha emitter that wreaks havoc on DNA, RNA, proteins and enzymes. Over time, mutations form and cancers develop. Children have been born with birth defects. DU has been found in all parts of the body.
Initial symptoms of DU contamination may include severe headaches, fatigue, shortness of breath, night sweats, fever, poor appetite, joint pain, gastrointestinal problems, rashes and oozing lesions. Later on more serious conditions develop, including cognitive difficulties, memory loss, mood swings, neuropathies, blood disorders, menstrual problems, burning semen, increased pain and greater immobility. Death by DU poisoning can be slow and agonizing.
Of the more than 670,000 troops deployed to the Gulf in 1991, about one-third of them now receive disability compensation. According to Doug Rokke, former Army physicist and director of DU cleanup following the first gulf war, more than 11,000 have died since that war ended. (The ground war, which lasted only 100 hours, claimed 179 lives, most from friendly fire.)
Gulf War I troops were exposed to a plethora of harmful substances. There were untested vaccinations, unproven prophylactic medications, potent insect repellents, carcinogen-laden cleaning products, oil fires, sarin gas, and depleted uranium. While most doctors and scientists agree that the unexplained illnesses, which they labeled Gulf War Syndrome, are likely due to a synergistic effect of all of the toxic exposures, some argue that DU caused most of the problems. ...
Of the more than 670,000 troops deployed to the Gulf in 1991, about one-third of them now receive disability compensation.Remember your mother's warning, "If you can't clean up after yourself, don't make the mess"? Didn't we subject our children to that mantra?
Take Iraq, for example. During the 1991 Gulf War our military attacked Iraq and its people with over 350 tons of depleted uranium (DU). During the current war and occupation we've fired 2,200-plus tons on people and cities all over Iraq. A byproduct of uranium enrichment, DU remains radioactive for 4.5 billion years. We have turned the cradle of civilization into a toxic wasteland.
DU is cheap. Nuclear power plants are glad to have arms manufacturers take this radioactive waste material off their hands. DU is effective, 1.7 times denser than lead. It's pyrophoric, burning everything it hits into a charred crisp.
When DU weapons strike targets, a fine aerosol of uranium oxide is formed, which can be inhaled. Inhaled particles can cause serious damage, especially the insoluble particles that can remain in the body a long time. DU is an alpha emitter that wreaks havoc on DNA, RNA, proteins and enzymes. Over time, mutations form and cancers develop. Children have been born with birth defects. DU has been found in all parts of the body.
Initial symptoms of DU contamination may include severe headaches, fatigue, shortness of breath, night sweats, fever, poor appetite, joint pain, gastrointestinal problems, rashes and oozing lesions. Later on more serious conditions develop, including cognitive difficulties, memory loss, mood swings, neuropathies, blood disorders, menstrual problems, burning semen, increased pain and greater immobility. Death by DU poisoning can be slow and agonizing.
Of the more than 670,000 troops deployed to the Gulf in 1991, about one-third of them now receive disability compensation. According to Doug Rokke, former Army physicist and director of DU cleanup following the first gulf war, more than 11,000 have died since that war ended. (The ground war, which lasted only 100 hours, claimed 179 lives, most from friendly fire.)
Gulf War I troops were exposed to a plethora of harmful substances. There were untested vaccinations, unproven prophylactic medications, potent insect repellents, carcinogen-laden cleaning products, oil fires, sarin gas, and depleted uranium. While most doctors and scientists agree that the unexplained illnesses, which they labeled Gulf War Syndrome, are likely due to a synergistic effect of all of the toxic exposures, some argue that DU caused most of the problems. ...
Sunday, April 09, 2006
Bush’s EPA Nominee Has Relaxed Rules For Polluters, Weakened Clean Air Legislation
Think Progress � Bush’s EPA Nominee Has Relaxed Rules For Polluters, Weakened Clean Air Legislation: "Bush’s EPA Nominee Has Relaxed Rules For Polluters, Weakened Clean Air Legislation
William Wehrum, President Bush’s nominee to head the EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation (OAR), has earned a reputation in Washington as “the behind-the-scenes architect” of some of the Bush administration’s most controversial initiatives. Some lowlights:
- Wehrum was a lead author of Bush’s “Clear Skies” legislation, which would have loosened emissions caps on dangerous airborne toxins.
- In 2002, while serving as OAR’s general counsel, Wehrum shepherded through a rule written by forest products industry lobbyists that relaxed the emission standards for formaldehyde. Wehrum had previously represented those same timber interests as a lobbyist.
- In 2004, Wehrum implemented new industry-friendly mercury guidelines that substantially weakened the Clean Air Act. Again, Wehrum’s former lobbying firm played an instrumental role in drafting the rule.
- Just this week, a draft of a new air pollution rule, drafted under the oversight of Wehrum, came under fire from congressional leaders. The proposal would allow polluters to discharge thousands of pounds of airborne toxins while “virtually avoiding regulation.“
The good news: Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) plans to put a hold on Wehrum’s nomination if it moves to the Senate floor."
William Wehrum, President Bush’s nominee to head the EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation (OAR), has earned a reputation in Washington as “the behind-the-scenes architect” of some of the Bush administration’s most controversial initiatives. Some lowlights:
- Wehrum was a lead author of Bush’s “Clear Skies” legislation, which would have loosened emissions caps on dangerous airborne toxins.
- In 2002, while serving as OAR’s general counsel, Wehrum shepherded through a rule written by forest products industry lobbyists that relaxed the emission standards for formaldehyde. Wehrum had previously represented those same timber interests as a lobbyist.
- In 2004, Wehrum implemented new industry-friendly mercury guidelines that substantially weakened the Clean Air Act. Again, Wehrum’s former lobbying firm played an instrumental role in drafting the rule.
- Just this week, a draft of a new air pollution rule, drafted under the oversight of Wehrum, came under fire from congressional leaders. The proposal would allow polluters to discharge thousands of pounds of airborne toxins while “virtually avoiding regulation.“
The good news: Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) plans to put a hold on Wehrum’s nomination if it moves to the Senate floor."
Thursday, April 06, 2006
Bush authorized leak of Iraq intelligence estimate, indicted ex-Cheney aide says [... leading to outing of CIA Agent]
The Raw Story | Bush authorized leak of Iraq intelligence estimate, indicted ex-Cheney aide says: "RAW STORY | Published: Thursday April 6, 2006
A former White House aide under indictment for obstructing a leak probe, I. Lewis Libby, testified to a grand jury that he gave information from a closely-guarded "National Intelligence Estimate" on Iraq to a New York Times reporter in 2003 with the specific permission of President Bush, according to a n Publish Post ew court filing from the special prosecutor in the case, ...
...
Dems call for Bush to 'come clean,' cite 8 denials
A former White House aide under indictment for obstructing a leak probe, I. Lewis Libby, testified to a grand jury that he gave information from a closely-guarded "National Intelligence Estimate" on Iraq to a New York Times reporter in 2003 with the specific permission of President Bush, according to a n Publish Post ew court filing from the special prosecutor in the case, ...
...
Dems call for Bush to 'come clean,' cite 8 denials
After today's claim by Ex-VP chief of staff "Scooter" Libby that he was led to believe the President had approved the leak of classified information to reporters, Democrats have called for the President to set the record straight about his alleged involvement.
"President Bush must fully disclose his participation in the selective leaking of classified information," said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid in a brief statement. "It's time for the President to come clean about his involvement in the leak case."
The statement was accompanied by eight of the numerous instances in which Bush or his spokesman, White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, denied the President had knowledge of the leak.
That incidents identified by Democrats follow:
"If there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of. . . . I have told our administration, people in my administration to be fully cooperative. I want to know the truth. If anybody has got any information inside our administration or outside our administration, it would be helpful if they came forward with the information so we can find out whether or not these allegations are true and get on about the business."
"I'd like to know if somebody in my White House did leak sensitive information."
"If someone committed crime, they will no longer work in my administration."
Sunday, March 26, 2006
IRS Audited Greenpeace At Request of ExxonMobil-Funded Group
Democracy Now! | IRS Audited Greenpeace At Request of ExxonMobil-Funded Group: "Friday, March 24th, 2006
The Wall Street Journal revealed this week a little-known watchdog group was responsible for getting the IRS to audit the environmental organization Greenpeace. Two years ago, Public Interest Watch challenged Greenpeace's tax-exempt status and accused the group of money laundering and other crimes. According to the Journal, tax records show more than 95 percent of the funding of Public Interest Watch was provided by the oil giant ExxonMobil.
The Wall Street Journal revealed this week a little-known watchdog group was responsible for getting the IRS to audit the environmental organization Greenpeace. Two years ago, Public Interest Watch challenged Greenpeace's tax-exempt status and accused the group of money laundering and other crimes. According to the Journal, tax records show more than 95 percent of the funding of Public Interest Watch was provided by the oil giant ExxonMobil.
On its website, Public Interest Watch says it was founded "in response to the growing misuse of charitable funds by nonprofit organizations and the lack of effort by government agencies to deal with the problem." The group describes its mission as: "Keeping an Eye on the Self-Appointed Guardians of the Public Interest." ...
Former DeLay Aide Enriched By Nonprofit
Former DeLay Aide Enriched By Nonprofit: "Bulk of Group's Funds Tied to Abramoff | By R. Jeffrey Smith | Washington Post Staff Writer | Sunday, March 26, 2006; A01
A top adviser to former House Whip Tom DeLay received more than a third of all the money collected by the U.S. Family Network, a nonprofit organization the adviser created to promote a pro-family political agenda in Congress, according to the group's accounting records.
DeLay's former chief of staff, Edwin A. Buckham, who helped create the group while still in DeLay's employ, and his wife, Wendy, were the principal beneficiaries of the group's $3.02 million in revenue, collecting payments totaling $1,022,729 during a five-year period ending in 2001, public and private records show.
The group's revenue was drawn mostly from clients of Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff, according to its records. From an FBI subpoena for the records, it can be inferred that the bureau is exploring whether there were links between the payments and favorable legislative treatment of Abramoff's clients by DeLay's office." ...
A top adviser to former House Whip Tom DeLay received more than a third of all the money collected by the U.S. Family Network, a nonprofit organization the adviser created to promote a pro-family political agenda in Congress, according to the group's accounting records.
DeLay's former chief of staff, Edwin A. Buckham, who helped create the group while still in DeLay's employ, and his wife, Wendy, were the principal beneficiaries of the group's $3.02 million in revenue, collecting payments totaling $1,022,729 during a five-year period ending in 2001, public and private records show.
The group's revenue was drawn mostly from clients of Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff, according to its records. From an FBI subpoena for the records, it can be inferred that the bureau is exploring whether there were links between the payments and favorable legislative treatment of Abramoff's clients by DeLay's office." ...
group questioned whether Barbara Bush should be allowed to channel donation to Neil Bush's Ignite Learning company thru Houston relief fund
Chron.com | Barbara Bush's Katrina donation ignites debate: "March 24, 2006, 1:30AM | HISD says focus on Neil Bush's software didn't violate policy | By JENNIFER RADCLIFFE | Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle
As Barbara Bush spent two hours championing her son's software company at a Houston middle school Thursday morning, a watchdog group questioned whether the former first lady should be allowed to channel a donation to Neil Bush's Ignite Learning company through Houston's Hurricane Katrina relief fund.
'It's strange that the former first lady would want to do this. If her son's having a rough time of it, couldn't she write him a check?' said Daniel Borochoff, founder of the American Institute of Philanthropy, a Chicago-based charity watchdog group. 'Maybe she isn't aware that people could frown upon this.'
Some critics said donations to a tax-deductible charitable fund shouldn't benefit the Bush family. Others questioned whether the Houston Independent School District violated district policy by allowing the company to host a promotional event on campus."
As Barbara Bush spent two hours championing her son's software company at a Houston middle school Thursday morning, a watchdog group questioned whether the former first lady should be allowed to channel a donation to Neil Bush's Ignite Learning company through Houston's Hurricane Katrina relief fund.
'It's strange that the former first lady would want to do this. If her son's having a rough time of it, couldn't she write him a check?' said Daniel Borochoff, founder of the American Institute of Philanthropy, a Chicago-based charity watchdog group. 'Maybe she isn't aware that people could frown upon this.'
Some critics said donations to a tax-deductible charitable fund shouldn't benefit the Bush family. Others questioned whether the Houston Independent School District violated district policy by allowing the company to host a promotional event on campus."
New gov't data shows GOP pension bill would create severe crisis
Sirotablog: New gov't data shows GOP pension bill would create severe crisis: "3.23.06
Let's see...what do you do if you are the most corrupt, bought-off political party in history, and America's pension safety net is grossly underfunded at the very time more and more corporations are reneging on their pension promises? The answer is obvious: you use the crisis to pass new legislation that allows corporations to get out of their obligations to shore up that safety net. And that's exactly what the Bush administration and Republicans in Congress are doing, according to a new report by the Financial Times today.
This sounds ludicrous. It sounds ridiculous. It sounds like something out of a bad Saturday Night Live skit. But, I kid you not - this is exactly what's going on. Here's the excerpt:
'Employers will be able to slash their contributions to underfunded pension schemes by tens of billions of dollars over the next five years under proposed legislation before Congress that was expected to have the opposite effect. The legislation was proposed by the White House last year to lessen the risk of a taxpayer bailout of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, a federal safety net for pension schemes...Assuming an average corporate tax rate of 35 per cent, the data suggest a temporary but significant drop in employer payments into pension schemes over the next few years...Funding of pension schemes would reach a low ebb in 2008 under both versions.'
This is truly a new low, even for this White House. Here we have a major pension crisis unfolding right before our eyes. And the Bush administration and Republicans in Congress, by actually further weakening the system, are openly doing the bidding of the corporate interests that have created this crisis in the first place." ...
Let's see...what do you do if you are the most corrupt, bought-off political party in history, and America's pension safety net is grossly underfunded at the very time more and more corporations are reneging on their pension promises? The answer is obvious: you use the crisis to pass new legislation that allows corporations to get out of their obligations to shore up that safety net. And that's exactly what the Bush administration and Republicans in Congress are doing, according to a new report by the Financial Times today.
This sounds ludicrous. It sounds ridiculous. It sounds like something out of a bad Saturday Night Live skit. But, I kid you not - this is exactly what's going on. Here's the excerpt:
'Employers will be able to slash their contributions to underfunded pension schemes by tens of billions of dollars over the next five years under proposed legislation before Congress that was expected to have the opposite effect. The legislation was proposed by the White House last year to lessen the risk of a taxpayer bailout of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, a federal safety net for pension schemes...Assuming an average corporate tax rate of 35 per cent, the data suggest a temporary but significant drop in employer payments into pension schemes over the next few years...Funding of pension schemes would reach a low ebb in 2008 under both versions.'
This is truly a new low, even for this White House. Here we have a major pension crisis unfolding right before our eyes. And the Bush administration and Republicans in Congress, by actually further weakening the system, are openly doing the bidding of the corporate interests that have created this crisis in the first place." ...
Thursday, March 23, 2006
Barbara Bush donated an undisclosed amount to Bush-Clinton Katrina Fund with instructions that the money be spent with company owned by her son Neil
Chron.com | Katrina funds earmarked to pay for Neil Bush's software program: "March 23, 2006, 9:01PM | Former first lady's donation aids son | Katrina funds earmarked to pay for Neil Bush's software program | By CYNTHIA LEONOR GARZA | Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle
Former first lady Barbara Bush donated an undisclosed amount of money to the Bush-Clinton Katrina Fund with specific instructions that the money be spent with an educational software company owned by her son Neil.
Since then, the Ignite Learning program has been given to eight area schools that took in substantial numbers of Hurricane Katrina evacuees." ...
Former first lady Barbara Bush donated an undisclosed amount of money to the Bush-Clinton Katrina Fund with specific instructions that the money be spent with an educational software company owned by her son Neil.
Since then, the Ignite Learning program has been given to eight area schools that took in substantial numbers of Hurricane Katrina evacuees." ...
Sunday, March 19, 2006
Pension bill , rather than strengthening the system, would actually weaken it, ower corporate contributions to the already underfiunded progam
Major Changes Raise Concerns on Pension Bill - New York Times: "By MARY WILLIAMS WALSH | Published: March 19, 2006
With a strong directive from the Bush administration, Congress set out more than a year ago to fashion legislation that would protect America's private pension system, tightening the rules to make sure companies set aside enough money to make good on their promises to employees.
Then the political horse-trading began, with lawmakers, companies and lobbyists, representing everything from big Wall Street firms to tiny rural electric cooperatives, weighing in on the particulars of the Bush administration's blueprint.
In the end, lawmakers modified many of the proposed rules, allowing companies more time to cover pension shortfalls, to make more forgiving estimates about how much they will owe workers in the future, and even sometimes to assume that their workers will die younger than the rest of the population.
On top of those changes, companies also persuaded lawmakers to add dozens of specific measures, including a multibillion-dollar escape clause for the nation's airlines and a special exemption for the makers of Smithfield Farms hams.
As a result, the bill now being completed in a House-Senate conference committee, rather than strengthening the pension system, would actually weaken it, according to a little-noticed analysis by the government's pension agency. The agency's report projects that the House and Senate bills would lower corporate contributions to the already underfinanced pension system by $140 billion to $160 billion in the next three years. ...
$2,000 was the maximum amount paid on nearly a dozen [CORPORATE FINES] penalties ranging from $86,500 to $180,000;
Excite News: "More Corporations Stiffing Gov't on Fines | Mar 18, 9:57 PM (ET) | By MARTHA MENDOZA and CHRISTOPHER SULLIVAN
When a gasoline spill and fiery explosion killed three young people in Washington state, officials announced a record penalty against a gas pipeline company: $3 million to send the message that such tragedies "must never happen again."
When nuclear labs around the country were found exposing workers to radiation and breaking other safety rules, assessments totaling $2.5 million were quickly ordered.
When coal firms' violations were blamed for deaths, injuries and risks to miners from Alabama to West Virginia, they were slapped with more than $1.3 million in penalties.
What happened next with these no-nonsense enforcement efforts? Not much. The pipeline tab was eventually reduced by 92 percent, the labs' assessments were waived as soon as they were issued, and the mine penalties largely went unpaid.
The amount of unpaid federal fines has risen sharply in the last decade. Individuals and corporations regularly avoid large, highly publicized penalties for wrongdoing - sometimes through negotiations, sometimes because companies go bankrupt, sometimes due to officials' failure to keep close track of who owes what under a decentralized collection system.
_The government is currently owed more than $35 billion in fines and other payments from criminals and in civil cases, according to Justice Department figures. This is almost five times the amount uncollected 10 years ago - and enough to cover the annual budget of the Department of Homeland Security. A decade ago, Congress mandated that fines be imposed regardless of defendants' ability to pay, which has added tremendously to outstanding debt.
_In 2004, federal authorities ordered $7.8 billion in 98,985 fines, penalties and restitution demands in criminal and civil cases, but collected less than half of that.
_White-collar crime cases account for the largest amount of uncollected debt. In a study, Government Accountability Office investigators found that just 7 percent of restitution in such cases is paid.
"Fines and orders to pay restitution are an important part of how we punish convicted criminals. When so little effort is made to collect that money, we allow convicted criminals to avoid punishment for their crimes, weaken our criminal justice system and ultimately deny justice to the victims of crimes," said Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., who has pressed for closer scrutiny for years.
...
Documents provided to the AP by the Labor Department's Employment Benefits Security Administration, whose job is to protect pension and welfare benefits, showed that $2,000 was the maximum amount paid on nearly a dozen penalties ranging from $86,500 to $180,000; these were for various kinds of violations, everything from failure to file reports to self-dealing by pension fund managers.
Why the reductions? Officials explained that compliance is the agency's goal, and that the law allows penalties to be reduced when companies make amends. Violators who don't comply risk being referred to the Treasury Department, which can collect by seizing federal benefits.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration's written policy explains to inspectors that they can reduce penalties by as much as 95 percent, "depending upon the employer's 'good faith,' (25 percent) 'size of business,' (60 percent) and 'history of previous violations.' (10 percent)"
Internal documents from U.S. Customs show that dramatically large fines may be cut sharply.
Agency documents released under AP's FOIA request listed, for example, a $60,911,316 "commercial fraud" assessment for one company - but the case ended with a $15,000 collection by Customs. ...
$2,000 was the maximum amount paid on nearly a dozen [CORPORATE FINES] penalties ranging from $86,500 to $180,000;
Excite News: "More Corporations Stiffing Gov't on Fines | Mar 18, 9:57 PM (ET) | By MARTHA MENDOZA and CHRISTOPHER SULLIVAN
The amount of unpaid federal fines has risen sharply in the last decade. Individuals and corporations regularly avoid large, highly publicized penalties for wrongdoing - sometimes through negotiations, sometimes because companies go bankrupt, sometimes due to officials' failure to keep close track of who owes what under a decentralized collection system....
When a gasoline spill and fiery explosion killed three young people in Washington state, officials announced a record penalty against a gas pipeline company: $3 million to send the message that such tragedies "must never happen again."
When nuclear labs around the country were found exposing workers to radiation and breaking other safety rules, assessments totaling $2.5 million were quickly ordered.
When coal firms' violations were blamed for deaths, injuries and risks to miners from Alabama to West Virginia, they were slapped with more than $1.3 million in penalties.
What happened next with these no-nonsense enforcement efforts? Not much. The pipeline tab was eventually reduced by 92 percent, the labs' assessments were waived as soon as they were issued, and the mine penalties largely went unpaid.
 |
_The government is currently owed more than $35 billion in fines and other payments from criminals and in civil cases, according to Justice Department figures. This is almost five times the amount uncollected 10 years ago - and enough to cover the annual budget of the Department of Homeland Security. A decade ago, Congress mandated that fines be imposed regardless of defendants' ability to pay, which has added tremendously to outstanding debt.
_In 2004, federal authorities ordered $7.8 billion in 98,985 fines, penalties and restitution demands in criminal and civil cases, but collected less than half of that.
_White-collar crime cases account for the largest amount of uncollected debt. In a study, Government Accountability Office investigators found that just 7 percent of restitution in such cases is paid.
"Fines and orders to pay restitution are an important part of how we punish convicted criminals. When so little effort is made to collect that money, we allow convicted criminals to avoid punishment for their crimes, weaken our criminal justice system and ultimately deny justice to the victims of crimes," said Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., who has pressed for closer scrutiny for years.
...
Documents provided to the AP by the Labor Department's Employment Benefits Security Administration, whose job is to protect pension and welfare benefits, showed that $2,000 was the maximum amount paid on nearly a dozen penalties ranging from $86,500 to $180,000; these were for various kinds of violations, everything from failure to file reports to self-dealing by pension fund managers.
Why the reductions? Officials explained that compliance is the agency's goal, and that the law allows penalties to be reduced when companies make amends. Violators who don't comply risk being referred to the Treasury Department, which can collect by seizing federal benefits.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration's written policy explains to inspectors that they can reduce penalties by as much as 95 percent, "depending upon the employer's 'good faith,' (25 percent) 'size of business,' (60 percent) and 'history of previous violations.' (10 percent)"
Internal documents from U.S. Customs show that dramatically large fines may be cut sharply.
Agency documents released under AP's FOIA request listed, for example, a $60,911,316 "commercial fraud" assessment for one company - but the case ended with a $15,000 collection by Customs. ...
Friday, March 17, 2006
Judges Overturn Bush [administration] Bid to Ease Pollution Rules
Judges Overturn Bush Bid to Ease Pollution Rules - New York Times: "By MICHAEL JANOFSKY | Published: March 18, 2006
WASHINGTON, March 17 — A federal appeals court on Friday overturned a clean-air regulation issued by the Bush administration that would have let many power plants, refineries and factories avoid installing costly new pollution controls to help offset any increased emissions caused by repairs and replacements of equipment.
Ruling in favor of a coalition of states and environmental advocacy groups, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said the "plain language" of the law required a stricter approach. The court has primary jurisdiction in challenges to federal regulations. ...
WASHINGTON, March 17 — A federal appeals court on Friday overturned a clean-air regulation issued by the Bush administration that would have let many power plants, refineries and factories avoid installing costly new pollution controls to help offset any increased emissions caused by repairs and replacements of equipment.
Ruling in favor of a coalition of states and environmental advocacy groups, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said the "plain language" of the law required a stricter approach. The court has primary jurisdiction in challenges to federal regulations. ...
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
NY Times ' Shane failed to report Sen. Roberts's role in Intel Committee stalemate ... investigation had been put "on the back-burner"
Media Matters - NY Times ' Shane failed to report Sen. Roberts's role in Intel Committee stalemate: "
Summary: A New York Times article on partisanship in the Senate Intelligence Committee investigations ignored the conduct of committee chair Pat Roberts in impeding investigations or blocking them outright.
A March 12 article by New York Times staff writer Scott Shane attributed to a 'partisan standoff' both the Senate Intelligence Committee's delay in completing the second phase of its investigation of prewar intelligence on Iraq and its failure to probe the CIA's handling of terrorism suspects. But in attributing the committee's failures to partisanship, Shane ignored the conduct of committee chairman Pat Roberts (R-KA) in apparently impeding both of these investigations or blocking them outright."
...
But Shane overlooked Roberts's apparent responsibility in both cases. Roberts has apparently delayed -- repeatedly -- the second phase of the committee's investigation into the administration's use of prewar intelligence, deeming it unnecessary. The committee's Phase I investigation, completed in April 2004, concerned the intelligence community's failure to provide accurate intelligence on the Iraqi threat. During the course of the initial investigation, Democrats on the committee reached an agreement with their Republican counterparts to conduct a second phase examining the administration's use of prewar intelligence.
Summary: A New York Times article on partisanship in the Senate Intelligence Committee investigations ignored the conduct of committee chair Pat Roberts in impeding investigations or blocking them outright.
A March 12 article by New York Times staff writer Scott Shane attributed to a 'partisan standoff' both the Senate Intelligence Committee's delay in completing the second phase of its investigation of prewar intelligence on Iraq and its failure to probe the CIA's handling of terrorism suspects. But in attributing the committee's failures to partisanship, Shane ignored the conduct of committee chairman Pat Roberts (R-KA) in apparently impeding both of these investigations or blocking them outright."
...
But Shane overlooked Roberts's apparent responsibility in both cases. Roberts has apparently delayed -- repeatedly -- the second phase of the committee's investigation into the administration's use of prewar intelligence, deeming it unnecessary. The committee's Phase I investigation, completed in April 2004, concerned the intelligence community's failure to provide accurate intelligence on the Iraqi threat. During the course of the initial investigation, Democrats on the committee reached an agreement with their Republican counterparts to conduct a second phase examining the administration's use of prewar intelligence.
Roberts initially called Phase II a "priority" and claimed that it would be completed sometime after the 2004 presidential election. But, in March 2005, he disclosed that it had been put "on the back-burner" and, on March 31, 2005, released a statement describing the investigation as "a monumental waste of time." In a June 22, 2005, letter, Senate Democrats urged the committee to "accelerate to completion the work of the so-called 'Phase II' effort to assess how policy makers used the intelligence they received." But in a July 20, 2005, response, Roberts disputed the fact that the committee had "agree[d] to examine the vague notion" of how policymakers used intelligence.
During the following months, Roberts failed to report any subsequent progress on Phase II, despite repeated inquiries from Democratic committee members. In response, Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid (NV) forced the Senate into a rare closed-door session on November 1, 2005, and demanded a pledge from Roberts that the investigation would be completed.
Roberts immediately denied that he had stalled the investigation. "It isn't like it's been delayed," he said on the Senate floor that day. "As a matter of fact, it's been ongoing. As a matter of fact, we have been doing our work on Phase II." He again pledged to finish the investigation, despite continuing to dismiss the probe as unnecessary and irrelevant. On November 14, 2005, three Democratic members of the committee reported to Reid and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) that Roberts refused to exact "additional interviews and documents" needed to fully answer the "critical questions surrounding the use of intelligence in the months leading up to the war." ....
Bush's Fake Aid .... MCC appears to be using aid to reward countries that support the president's war on terror
Rolling Stone : Bush's Fake Aid: "The president's $5 billion program does more for foreign banks than the needy
In March 2002, with one war raging in Afghanistan and another looming in Iraq, President Bush announced that he intended to undercut terrorism by attacking poverty overseas. "I'm here today to announce a major new commitment by the United States to bring hope and opportunity to the world's poorest," Bush declared. Under his watch, the president said, America would increase its annual foreign aid to $5 billion. And instead of giving handouts, he added, the program would employ an entirely new model: investing in countries to spark their economic growth and holding them accountable for their policies. "I carry this commitment in my soul," Bush said, concluding his speech with a trademark religious touch. "We will make the world not only safer but better."
...
In March 2002, with one war raging in Afghanistan and another looming in Iraq, President Bush announced that he intended to undercut terrorism by attacking poverty overseas. "I'm here today to announce a major new commitment by the United States to bring hope and opportunity to the world's poorest," Bush declared. Under his watch, the president said, America would increase its annual foreign aid to $5 billion. And instead of giving handouts, he added, the program would employ an entirely new model: investing in countries to spark their economic growth and holding them accountable for their policies. "I carry this commitment in my soul," Bush said, concluding his speech with a trademark religious touch. "We will make the world not only safer but better."
...
In a pattern that has become a hallmark of the administration, however, Bush's aid initiative -- the Millennium Challenge Corporation -- has become an object lesson in dramatic ideas followed by disastrous action. Over the past three months, Rolling Stone has reviewed the MCC's "compacts" with foreign countries, compared the work of similar agencies and spoken with a wide range of supporters and critics -- including many of the conservative insiders responsible for creating the program. Instead of hiring aid experts, the administration at first staffed the MCC with conservative ideologues. Rather than partnering with other countries, the White House operated on its own, disconnected from the rest of the world. And when experts criticized the new agency, the administration responded with a bunker mentality, refusing to talk to detractors and learn from its mistakes.
Today, four years after the president announced his initiative, the MCC has signed compacts with six countries -- offering only $1.2 billion in assistance. In February, Bush released a budget for 2007 that falls another $2 billion short of his pledge, bringing the total aid to less than half of what he promised. And the new budget once again pushes back the goal, stating that the administration "expects" to provide $5 billion annually in 2008.
...
Even leading conservatives who initially supported the program are now blasting the MCC. "The great promise of the Millennium Challenge was met with tremendous hope and anticipation," said Rep. Henry Hyde, who voted to authorize the initiative as chairman of the House International Relations Committee. But now, he said, "we see a program struggling to get off the ground . . . lacking the boldness necessary to break the cycle of poverty" -- a failure that "belies the original vision."
...
The six compacts signed by the MCC reflect this pro-business ideology. In Cape Verde, the agency plans to spend almost $86 million to mobilize investment and build the infrastructure needed to move goods to market -- nearly all of the $110 million in aid to the impoverished country. In Nicaragua, another $92 million in aid will be spent on infrastructure. In Georgia, the MCC will spend $32.5 million to establish a Wall Street-style investment for "enterprise development." Other projects under consideration have included an industrial park in Senegal and a tourist resort in Central America. "The early compacts don't reflect a broad swath of needs, like health and education," says David Gootnick, director of international affairs and trade at the GAO.
In some cases, the MCC appears to be using aid to reward countries that support the president's war on terror -- even though it is not supposed to base assistance on political favoritism. Georgia, which has served as a base for U.S. military operations, received $295.3 million from the MCC -- despite corruption and human-rights abuses that should make it ineligible for assistance under the MCC's own guidelines. "I see an awful lot of politics in this," says Fiona Hill, an expert on the former Soviet states at the Brookings Institution. "Georgia has taken steps back in terms of rights and freedoms." Testifying before Congress, even Applegarth acknowledged that the aid to Georgia involved what he discreetly referred to as an "element of judgment."...
Shocker: Senate Republicans Screw Veterans Again ... additional funding was to be paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes
BobGeiger.com: Shocker: Senate Republicans Screw Veterans Again: "Wednesday, March 15, 2006
In case you missed it in the Senate yesterday, Daniel Akaka (D-HI) proposed a bill to increase Veterans medical services funding by $1.5 billion in fiscal year 2007 and Republicans shot it down with extreme prejudice.
The kiss of death for America’s Veterans was the fact that the additional funding was to be paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes, which ensured that the GOP-dominated Senate would take care of its corporate donors before worrying about those who truly serve our nation.
The 46-54 vote was entirely down party lines, with all Democrats voting for the Veterans medical care funding and every Republican but Lincoln Chafee (R-RI) voting against it.
"What is again missing -- in dollars and in deed -- is that this Administration still does not count caring for veterans as part of the cost of war,” said Akaka, before the vote was taken. “Defense spending for our service members while in combat has necessarily gone up. Accordingly, so must our commitment to caring for veterans once they return home."...
In case you missed it in the Senate yesterday, Daniel Akaka (D-HI) proposed a bill to increase Veterans medical services funding by $1.5 billion in fiscal year 2007 and Republicans shot it down with extreme prejudice.
The kiss of death for America’s Veterans was the fact that the additional funding was to be paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes, which ensured that the GOP-dominated Senate would take care of its corporate donors before worrying about those who truly serve our nation.
The 46-54 vote was entirely down party lines, with all Democrats voting for the Veterans medical care funding and every Republican but Lincoln Chafee (R-RI) voting against it.
"What is again missing -- in dollars and in deed -- is that this Administration still does not count caring for veterans as part of the cost of war,” said Akaka, before the vote was taken. “Defense spending for our service members while in combat has necessarily gone up. Accordingly, so must our commitment to caring for veterans once they return home."...
Monday, March 13, 2006
10-year-old boy prisoner of Guantanamo Bay -- found innocent after two years of detainment - Sinpleton Says: - Collective Bellaciao
BELLACIAO - 10-year-old boy prisoner of Guantanamo Bay -- found innocent after two years of detainment - Sinpleton Says: - Collective Bellaciao: "March Saturday 11th 2006 (18h39) :
February Sunday 19th 2006 (05h00) : 10-year-old boy prisoner of Guantanamo Bay -- found innocent after two years of detainment 23 comment(s). From: Eric Smith> Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2004 02:10:46 0900 To: http://www.thenation.com/outrage/in... (hyperlinks also follow story.)
You’re kidding, right? That’s it?
After holding Brits in our extralegal dungeons for two years, one day we just let ’em go?
We’ve still got more than 600 people imprisoned in our Halliburton-built prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where for more than two years we’ve been interrogating them, denying them lawyers, denying them any kind of judicial review, hinting quite bluntly that they could all remain in limbo like this forever, and trying to put a brave face on all of the suicide attempts.
And every now and then, without comment, we bundle a few of them onto international flights and dump them out on a street somewhere -- and suddenly it turns out that this dangerous menace was just a bewildered Kabul taxi driver, or a 10-year-old."...
February Sunday 19th 2006 (05h00) : 10-year-old boy prisoner of Guantanamo Bay -- found innocent after two years of detainment 23 comment(s). From: Eric Smith> Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2004 02:10:46 0900 To: http://www.thenation.com/outrage/in... (hyperlinks also follow story.)
You’re kidding, right? That’s it?
After holding Brits in our extralegal dungeons for two years, one day we just let ’em go?
We’ve still got more than 600 people imprisoned in our Halliburton-built prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where for more than two years we’ve been interrogating them, denying them lawyers, denying them any kind of judicial review, hinting quite bluntly that they could all remain in limbo like this forever, and trying to put a brave face on all of the suicide attempts.
And every now and then, without comment, we bundle a few of them onto international flights and dump them out on a street somewhere -- and suddenly it turns out that this dangerous menace was just a bewildered Kabul taxi driver, or a 10-year-old."...
Saturday, March 11, 2006
Republican lawmakers don't just turn a blind eye ... They actually legalize the president's misdeeds.
About That Rebellion ... - New York Times: "Published: March 11, 2006
We keep hearing that the Republicans in Congress are in revolt against the president.
Some rebellion.
...
Republican lawmakers don't just turn a blind eye when they learn that the president is making profoundly bad choices, like cutting constitutional corners, abrogating treaties and even breaking the law. They actually legalize the president's misdeeds.
Take domestic spying, held up as another area of Republican revolt. The program violates the law. Congress knows it. The public knows it. Even President Bush knows it. (He just says the law doesn't apply to him.) In response, the Capitol Hill rebels are boldly refusing to investigate the program — or any other warrantless spying that is going on. They are trying to rewrite the law to legalize warrantless spying. And meanwhile, they've created new subcommittees to help the president go on defying the law.
Over the last couple of years, Republican lawmakers have been given proof that American soldiers and intelligence agents abused, tortured and even killed prisoners, or sent them to other countries to be tortured. Without hesitation, the Republicans did nothing — no serious investigation, no accountability.
Congressional and White House negotiators then watered down the new anti-torture law, which Mr. Bush said did not really apply to him anyway. And they passed another law actually encouraging the abuse of prisoners by allowing the use of coerced evidence at hearings on the prisoners' status.
After 9/11, Mr. Bush created a network of prisons outside the American legal system so he could hold people indefinitely without any hearings. When the Supreme Court said twice that he was reaching beyond his powers, the Republicans in Congress were determined not to let this assault on the rule of law continue. So they rose as one, and legalized the president's actions. In case there was any confusion about its resolve, Congress told the courts that they could no longer rule on these matters. Mr. Bush got the message, loud and clear. He sent his lawyers right out to inform the judges, including the Supreme Court, that they had to drop all the cases that were already before them. ...
Friday, March 10, 2006
Senate Panel Blocks Eavesdropping Probe
Senate Panel Blocks Eavesdropping Probe: "By Walter Pincus | Washington Post Staff Writer | Wednesday, March 8, 2006; Page A03
The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence voted along party lines yesterday to reject a Democratic proposal to investigate the Bush administration's domestic surveillance program and instead approved establishing, with White House approval, a seven-member panel to oversee the effort." ...
...
The panel's vice chairman, Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), took a sharply different view of yesterday's outcome. "The committee is, to put it bluntly, basically under the control of the White House through its chairman," he told reporters. "At the direction of the White House, the Republican majority has voted down my motion to have a careful and fact-based review of the National Security Agency's surveillance eavesdropping activities inside the United States." ...
The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence voted along party lines yesterday to reject a Democratic proposal to investigate the Bush administration's domestic surveillance program and instead approved establishing, with White House approval, a seven-member panel to oversee the effort." ...
...
The panel's vice chairman, Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), took a sharply different view of yesterday's outcome. "The committee is, to put it bluntly, basically under the control of the White House through its chairman," he told reporters. "At the direction of the White House, the Republican majority has voted down my motion to have a careful and fact-based review of the National Security Agency's surveillance eavesdropping activities inside the United States." ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)