Bush Warned About Mail-Opening Authority; Recent 'Signing Statement' Seen as Stretching Law

washingtonpost.com
Bush Warned About Mail-Opening Authority
Recent 'Signing Statement' Seen as Stretching Law
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer

President Bush signed a little-noticed statement last month asserting the authority to open U.S. mail without judicial warrants in emergencies or foreign intelligence cases, prompting warnings yesterday from Democrats and privacy advocates that the administration is attempting to circumvent legal restrictions on its powers.

A "signing statement" attached to a postal reform bill on Dec. 20 says the Bush administration "shall construe" a section of that law to allow the opening of sealed mail to protect life, guard against hazardous materials or conduct "physical searches specifically authorized by law for foreign intelligence collection."

White House and U.S. Postal Service officials said the statement was not intended to expand the powers of the executive branch but merely to clarify existing ones for extreme cases.

"This is not a change in law, this is not new, it is not . . . a sweeping new power by the president," spokesman Tony Snow told reporters. "It is, in fact, merely a statement of present law and present authorities granted to the president of the United States."

But some civil liberties and national-security law experts said the statement's language is unduly vague and appears to go beyond long-recognized limits on the ability of the government to open letters and other U.S. mail without approval from a judge.

Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies in Washington, said the government has long been able to legally open mail believed to contain a bomb or other imminent threat. But authorities are generally required to seek a warrant from a criminal or special intelligence court in other cases, Martin and other experts said.

"The administration is playing games about warrants," Martin said. "If they are not claiming new powers, then why did they need to issue a signing statement?"

Administration critics said they were particularly confused because the relevant portion of the postal reform legislation -- which prohibits opening mail without warrants in most circumstances -- remains unchanged.

A White House official, who was not authorized to speak on the record, said the signing statement, first revealed by the New York Daily News, was intended only to make clear that the new law would not limit the ability of the president or attorney general to open mail under emergency provisions of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which governs spying in the United States. That law allows authorities to conduct searches and surveillance without warrants in emergency situations, although they must apply for a warrant later.

"The point was that because Congress was passing this anew, the concern was that there would be some confusion," the official said. "The law that's been around since 1978 still allows you to conduct warrantless physical searches under some circumstances, and nothing changes that authority."

The debate over the signing statement comes after disclosures over the past year that Bush authorized a program that allows the National Security Agency to monitor telephone and e-mail communications between the United States and other countrieswithout court oversight. The administration has strongly defended the legality of the NSA spying program, arguing that Congress authorized it as part of the war on al-Qaeda and, even if it had not, that the president has the power to order such surveillance.

In addition to searching for a bomb or other hazardous device, postal officials are legally allowed to open letters that cannot be delivered as addressed, but only to find a correct destination for the parcel. The FBI and other law enforcement agencies are also allowed to obtain authority from postal inspectors to track mail without opening it.

The latest statement caused a small ruckus on Capitol Hill yesterday just as Democrats were taking control of Congress. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, called the statement a "last-minute, irregular and unauthorized reinterpretation of a duly passed law."

Sharp limits have been placed on the government's power to open mail since the 1970s, when a congressional committee investigating abuses found that, for three decades, the CIA and FBI had illegally opened hundreds of thousands of pieces of U.S. mail. Among the targets were "large numbers of American dissidents, including those who challenged the condition of racial minorities and those who opposed the war in Vietnam," according to a report by the Senate panel, known as the Church committee. Also surveilled was "the mail of Senators, Congressmen, journalists, businessmen, and even a Presidential candidate," the report said.

During his tenure, Bush has made plentiful use of signing statements, which are issued along with a president's signature on legislation. Although previous presidents used them as guidance for the executive branch, Bush has offered revised interpretations of laws on constitutional or national security grounds in some of his statements.

Read More...

Summary only...

NY subway 'hero' saves teenager

BBC NEWS
NY subway 'hero' saves teenager

A US construction worker has been hailed as a hero after rescuing a student who had fallen onto the tracks at a New York subway station.

Wesley Autrey jumped onto the tracks and rolled with 19-year-old Cameron Hollopeter into the trough between the rails at 137th Street station.

Mr Hollopeter, who had suffered a medical problem, was rescued just as a train was coming into the station.

Two cars passed over the men before stopping just inches above them.

The train operator had seen someone on the tracks and put the emergency brakes on.

The New York Times newspaper reported that Mr Hollopeter had suffered a seizure, which sent him convulsing off the platform and onto the tracks.

Moments after the train came to a halt, Mr Hollopeter asked if he was dead, Mr Autrey said.

"I said: 'You are very much alive, but if you move you'll kill the both of us.'"

Mr Autrey, a 50-year-old father of three and a navy veteran, said of his actions during the incident on Tuesday that he was doing what anyone should do in the same situation.

"I'm still saying I'm not a hero... 'cause I believe all New Yorkers should get into that type of mode," he told US TV on Thursday.

"You should do the right thing."

Gratitude

On Wednesday, he visited Mr Hollopeter and his family in hospital. Mr Hollopeter's father, Larry, addressed reporters outside.

"Mr Autrey's instinctive and unselfish act saved our son's life," he said.

"There are no words to properly express our gratitude and feelings for his actions."

Since his act of heroism, Mr Autrey has been interviewed by numerous media outlets and has been offered rewards by a number of people, including business tycoon Donald Trump.

Mr Autrey said he had been offered cash, trips and scholarships for his two daughters, who were with him at the time of the rescue.

"Donald Trump's got a check waiting on me," he said. "They offered to mail it; I said no, I'd like to meet the Donald, so I can say: 'Yo, you're fired.'"

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/6231971.stm

I

Read More...

Summary only...

"Surging" is No Plan: Concerned Americans Plan Picket Action at McCain/Lieberman Appearance

Huffinton Post
Steve Clemons
"Surging" is No Plan: Concerned Americans Plan Picket Action at McCain/Lieberman Appearance

It has become a sad cliche that Americans deserve better from their leadership than they are getting.

The President and some Members of Congress are calling for an increase in troop levels in Iraq to attempt to keep implementing the same domestic security and training plan for Iraqi police and militia units that America has had in place all along.

The plan has not changed -- just the call, finally, for more forces. But it's too late for 20,000 -- 30,000 -- or even 40,000 -- troops to matter.

I'm not sure that several hundred thousand troops would make a difference, but all bias aside, Iraq and the sectarian civil war that is erupting calls for a much bolder, bigger action than a simple "surge" in U.S. troops.

Solving Iraq, if it can be solved, now means getting real about and engaging in a broad range of Middle East dealmaking between internal groups inside Iraq as well as among its neighbors.

It means working to establish the State of Palestine in a manner that maintains the viability and security of both Israel and Palestine. It means offering Syria a Libya-like arrangement out of the international doghouse. It means massaging Iran's ego in the region without handing the entire Middle East over on a golden platter -- which America seems to be doing with its counterproductive strategy. It means figuring out what China and Russia want most in their foreign policy objectives and doing what we can to trade their needs for our own.

This all means that we must have an end to diplomacy on the cheap -- and national security on the cheap. And a surge in troop levels without a plan, without the other component parts of a credible and believable grand strategy -- is sending more soldiers off to die unnecessarily -- or to kill Iraqis, many who are absolutely innocent in all this mess and who will no doubt hate the United States for a long time ahead.

I cannot attend tomorrow as I am traveling, but there is a picket action that is taking place on Friday at noon in Washington at 1150 Seventeenth Street (near 17th and M Streets) to protest the campaign that Senators John McCain and Joseph Lieberman are launching tomorrow to support President Bush's call for more troops in Iraq.

This peaceful picket action is called "No Iraq Escalation" and folks will have colorful signs and other material to carry around if you wish.

I know both Senator McCain and Lieberman -- and I know that both think that this "surge" is something that they have to support. My response to them -- if I was discussing the matter privately -- is that they are not asking the tough questions of the President and of our nation's top strategists. They are not thinking this through well enough or fully enough and are calling for an "escalation" of an already terrible situation.

They need to hear some alternative voices out there. That's what our democracy is about.

Feel free to send this post to others in the DC area, or to other blogs, or email lists.

I hope that those of you who can will share your views tomorrow at 1150 17th Street and give our elected representatives a sense that Americans are sick of being asked to send young men and women into a war that has gone way off the rails.

Bush is cherry-picking the Iraq Study Group report -- cherry-picking what he wants to continue a failed four year plan. But without the big deal and the other important parts of the ISG Report, Bush -- and enabling Senators -- are making America's situation even worse.

-- Steve Clemons is Senior Fellow and Director of the American Strategy Program at the New America Foundation and publishes the popular political blog, The Washington Note

Read More...

Summary only...

House Bans Lobbyist Gifts, Business-Sponsored Travel

Yahoo! News
House Bans Lobbyist Gifts, Business-Sponsored Travel
Jonathan D. Salant

Jan. 4 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. House of Representatives, after installing its new Democratic leadership, voted to ban lawmakers from flying on corporate jets and accepting gifts and meals from lobbyists.

The House passed, 430-1, a package of rules aimed at demonstrating Democrats' commitment to cleaning up Congress. Tomorrow, the House will vote on rules designed to end the anonymous sponsorship of pet projects, or earmarks, that have been quietly tucked into spending measures.

``The culture of the last Congress came to be defined by a phrase now common to Americans throughout the country: it was a culture of corruption,'' said House Rules Committee Chairwoman Louise Slaughter, a New York Democrat. ``The American people stated loud and clear that they were ready for a new culture to take hold in Washington: a culture of commitment.''

As the Democrats won control of the House and Senate for the first time in 12 years, exit polls from the November election showed the issue resonated with voters. In a CNN exit poll, 42 percent of respondents said the issue was ``extremely important.''

``This is legislation I wish we had done,'' said Representative Christopher Shays (news, bio, voting record), a Connecticut Republican. ``I'm sorry it took a Democratic majority to do it.''

Four Republican House members resigned last year -- Randy ``Duke'' Cunningham of California after he admitted taking bribes; former Majority Leader Tom DeLay, indicted on money- laundering charges in Texas; Bob Ney of Ohio, who pleaded guilty to taking gifts from lobbyist Jack Abramoff in exchange for legislative favors; and Mark Foley of Florida, who sent suggestive e-mails to teenage pages.

`Edge of the Cliff'

``We pushed ethics to the very edge of the cliff and hoped the public would be interested in other things,'' Shays said. ``When Mark Foley came up, it pushed us over the cliff.''

Republican Dan Burton of Indiana cast the only vote against the rules adopted today.

House Republicans complained that the ethics rules were being rushed through without a chance to offer alternatives.

``We never even had an opportunity to have our amendments denied in the Rules Committee,'' said Representative David Dreier (news, bio, voting record) of California, chief sponsor of a Republican ethics proposal that failed to become law in the last Congress. That legislation was criticized as ineffective by Shays, Democrats and outside advocates.

Today's action may be a prelude to a more significant fight over reducing corruption and influence-buying. That could come in about two months after a task force formed by Pelosi, a California Democrat, and Minority Leader John Boehner, an Ohio Republican, announces whether it supports an outside ethics office to enforce the new rules. For now, members of Congress police themselves through a bipartisan ethics committee.

Honest Government

Those demanding more open and honest government say only independent enforcement will guarantee success.

``If you're not going to enforce the rules, it doesn't matter what they are,'' said former federal prosecutor Melanie Sloan, director of the Washington-based Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics.

The rules passed today apply only to House members and don't require any further congressional action or the signature of President George W. Bush. The proposed enforcement mechanism for the House and Senate would require passage by both houses and Bush's signature.

There is concern that the Senate, where 41 senators can block any action, may not go along in adopting strong ethics regulations. The Senate, with Democrats in control 51-49, is scheduled to begin debate on ethics legislation Jan. 8.

The House rules ban lobbyists and the organizations they work for from arranging overnight trips. Nonprofit foundations affiliated with lobbying groups could continue to pay for trips approved in advance by the House ethics committee.

Daylong Trips

Lobbying groups can sponsor daylong trips to factories or forums for lawmakers and their staffs.

``We want them to be able to see a manufacturing facility,'' said Jay Timmons, chief lobbyist for the National Association of Manufacturers in Washington, a trade group with members including Pittsburgh-based PPG Industries Inc. and Benton Harbor, Michigan- based Whirlpool Corp. ``They're able to take that experience back to their jobs.''

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, said he would begin by bringing up ethics legislation that passed last year when Republicans were in control. Groups such as Common Cause and Public Citizen say it isn't strong enough.

``I'm astounded the Senate Democratic leadership doesn't see the opportunity they have to step up to the plate,'' said Craig Holman, a campaign finance lobbyist for Washington-based Public Citizen.

`Strongest Possible'

Reid spokesman Jim Manley said the Senate measure that passed last year -- and stalled when the House and Senate couldn't agree on the provisions -- is just a starting point. ``Senator Reid is interested in getting the strongest possible legislation,'' he said.

Democratic Senators Russell Feingold of Wisconsin and Barack Obama of Illinois said today they will propose adopting the House restrictions on travel, letting senators use corporate jets if they pay the charter rate, and doubling to two years the waiting period before former lawmakers can become lobbyists.

Feingold and Obama also would require lobbyists to disclose fund-raisers they hold, and ban them from holding events to honor lawmakers at national party conventions.

Each house has its own ethics committee, split evenly between Republicans and Democrats, to investigate wrongdoing and punish it. The committees decide whether to undertake inquiries and have been criticized for lax enforcement.

``You've got to make the rules tough enough, and you have to have strong enforcement,'' said Feingold, whose proposal also calls for an independent ethics office.

Paul Miller, immediate past president of the American League of Lobbyists, said the system works and shouldn't be changed.

``Let's not overreact,'' he said. ``It has proven to be effective. Everyone who broke the law is going to prison.''

To contact the reporter on this story: Jonathan D. Salant in Washington at jsalant@bloomberg.net .

Read More...

Summary only...

Key Democrat didn't get the message: Might consider troop boost in Iraq

Reuters
Key Democrat might consider troop boost in Iraq
By Susan Cornwell

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush is likely to link any short-term increase in U.S. troop levels in Iraq to political milestones or other conditions, a key Senate Democrat said on Thursday, saying he might consider backing such a "surge" if those conditions are right.

Michigan Democrat Sen. Carl Levin also predicted the Republican president would soon find a way to end the "open-ended commitment" of U.S. troops to Iraq, even if Bush does propose a short-term boost in forces.

"I can't believe the president is simply going to say, 'We're going to increase troops in Iraq,'" Levin told reporters outside the Senate. "It's likely the president would add something of a conditionality to it."

"The (recent congressional) election is far too clear, that the public wants to change course and find a way out of Iraq and not get in deeper in Iraq," said Levin, who is the incoming chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

The White House says Bush is preparing to unveil a new strategy on Iraq that could come next week.

A quick, short-term troop increase, or "surge," is just one of many policy changes under consideration to try to reverse the deteriorating situation. But it is the one that has garnered the most attention in Washington, as American military deaths in Iraq have climbed above 3,000 and analysts question whether a troop increase can stem violence.

While the war's unpopularity helped Democrats win majorities in November congressional elections, lawmakers could probably not stop a quick boost in U.S. troops without cutting off war funding, which they have so far been unwilling to do.

But Congress, with its new Democratic majority, could pass resolutions calling for a drawdown of U.S. forces if it does not like Bush's new strategy, Levin said.

The new speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, California Democrat Nancy Pelosi, said the American people had "rejected an open-ended obligation to a war without end." In her first remarks as speaker, she said Bush should make clear to the Iraqis that they must defend their own security so the United States can "responsibly" redeploy its troops.

While he had no information on Bush's intentions, Levin said he thought Bush would "at a minimum" reverse the open-ended nature of the U.S. troop commitment in Iraq.

"I predict, whatever kind of surge he's going to propose, that he's going to find a way to correct the statement that he made twice to the Iraqis that we're there as long as the Iraqis want us to be there," Levin said.

Levin said any temporary "surge" he might consider backing, would need to be combined with the announcement of a reduction in U.S. forces starting in four to six months, and set political milestones for Iraq to meet.

Options developed by military planners could include up to 30,000 additional troops, according to defense officials. The United States now has 132,000 troops in Iraq.

Some other key Democrats, such as Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden, incoming chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, have rejected the idea of a U.S. troop "surge," calling it the "absolute wrong strategy." Republicans appear divided on the issue, with Arizona Sen. John McCain supporting the idea.

Read More...

Summary only...

Nuclear weapons agency chief quits over lapses

Reuters
Nuclear weapons agency chief quits over lapses
By David Morgan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The head of the U.S. nuclear weapons program resigned under pressure on Thursday following repeated security lapses at the Los Alamos National Laboratory.

Linton Brooks, administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration, was asked to tender his resignation to President George W. Bush after administration officials concluded he was unable to adequately address a series of management and security issues.

"These management and security issues can have serious implications for the security of the United States," Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said in a statement announcing Brooks' departure. "I have decided it is time for new leadership at the NNSA."


Bush was expected to name an acting director shortly.

The NNSA, an Energy Department agency, is responsible for maintaining the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile and reducing the global threat posed by weapons of mass destruction.

It was established 2000 after the Wen Ho Lee espionage scandal at the Los Alamos lab in New Mexico, birthplace of the atomic bomb and the site of U.S. nuclear weapons research.

A Taiwanese-American scientist, Lee was accused of stealing secrets about the U.S. nuclear arsenal for China in December 1999 but the charges were dropped. He later pleaded guilty to improperly handling of sensitive data.

Brooks' departure followed two other incidents at the lab.

Last June, word surfaced that a security breach at Los Alamos had led to the theft of files containing personal information on more than 1,000 workers. The breach had gone unreported for months.

Then in October, a drug raid on a Los Alamos trailer park turned up secret data taken from the lab by a female employee. The discovery raised concerns that the woman might have tried to sell the information to support a drug habit.

Brooks, 68, who has led the agency since 2003, said in a statement that his resignation came after NNSA failed over a period of years to deal with recurring problems that it had been set up to address.

"I accept the decision," he said. "Our task now is to minimize the inevitable disruption of such a transition and to continue the vital national security work on which we are engaged."

He was expected to leave the agency within three weeks.

Read More...

Summary only...

FBI files: Nixon, Reagan went to great lengths to discredit Rehnquist opponents during hearings

Yahoo! News
FBI files: Rehnquist had hallucinations
By MARK SHERMAN and PETE YOST, Associated Press Writers

The FBI's file on former Chief Justice William Rehnquist — made public more than a year after his death — indicates the Nixon and Reagan administrations enlisted its help in blunting criticism of him during confirmation hearings.

The file also offers insight into the hallucinations and other symptoms of withdrawal that Rehnquist suffered when he was taken off a prescription painkiller in 1981. A doctor was cited as saying that Rehnquist, an associate justice of the Supreme Court at the time, tried to escape the hospital in his pajamas and imagined that the CIA was plotting against him.

The FBI on Wednesday released 1,561 pages of documents on Rehnquist to The Associated Press, other news organizations and scholars in response to requests made under the Freedom of Information Act following Rehnquist's death in September 2005. An additional 207 pages were withheld under the federal disclosure law, and the FBI said an entire section of his file could not be found.

Much of the FBI's file on Rehnquist appears to have been compiled almost exclusively for his two Senate confirmations — his initial nomination to the court by President Nixon in 1971 and his nomination as chief justice by President Reagan in 1986. Administration officials apparently hoped to prevent any surprises from sinking his nominations.

In 1971, Deputy Attorney General Richard Kleindienst directed the FBI to conduct investigations of witnesses who were planning to testify at a Senate hearing against Rehnquist's confirmation. Fifteen years later during the Reagan administration, the FBI was enlisted to conduct background checks on witnesses who were scheduled to testify against Rehnquist's nomination to become chief justice.

The late Sen. Strom Thurmond, R-S.C., was chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1986 when Rehnquist was nominated to be chief justice. John Bolton, who resigned in December as President Bush's U.N. ambassador, was an assistant attorney general under Reagan.

"Thurmond just gave these names to Bolton they will testify for the Democrats and we want to know what they are going to say," a Justice Department official told a counterpart at the FBI, according to a memo in Rehnquist's file.

Alexander Charns, a Durham, N.C., lawyer who received the file and has extensively researched the FBI's relationship with the court, said the new disclosures show the two administrations went to some lengths to discredit Rehnquist opponents.

"In many ways, I guess it's the same old story of the political use of the FBI," Charns said.

The documents show that the FBI was aware in 1971 that Rehnquist had owned a home in Phoenix with a deed that allowed him to sell only to whites. The restrictive covenant was not disclosed until his 1986 confirmation hearings, at which Rehnquist said he became aware of the clause only days earlier.

Also detailed in the declassified file was Rehnquist's 1981 hospital stay for treatment of back pain and his dependence on powerful prescription pain-relief medication.

The FBI investigated his dependence on Placidyl, which Rehnquist had taken for at least 10 years, according to a summary of a 1970 medical examination.

When Rehnquist checked into a hospital in 1981 for a weeklong stay, doctors stopped administering the drug, causing what a hospital spokesman at the time said was a "disturbance in mental clarity."

The FBI file, citing one of his physicians, said Rehnquist experienced withdrawal symptoms that included trying to escape the facility and discerning changes in the patterns on the hospital curtains. The justice also thought he heard voices outside his room discussing various plots against him.

The doctor said Placidyl is a highly toxic drug and that she could not understand why anyone would prescribe it, especially for long periods.

Prior to his hospitalization, Rehnquist occasionally slurred his speech in his questions to lawyers at Supreme Court arguments. Those problems ceased when he changed medications, the doctor said.

Charns said some of the censored documents provide intriguing hints of what else Rehnquist's file might contain.

In one previously secret memo from 1971, an FBI official wrote, "No persons interviewed during our current or 1969 investigation furnished information bearing adversely on Rehnquist's morals or professional integrity; however ..." The next third of the page is blacked out, under the disclosure law's exception for matters of national security.

"It would be nice to know what is still classified, three decades later," Charns said.

Read More...

Summary only...

The Mandate for Peace

Huffington Post
Tom Hayden
The Mandate for Peace

To: the Incoming 110th Congress
From: Tom Hayden
Re: The Mandate for Peace

We call on you to adopt an exit strategy to bring our troops home and end the Iraq War in 2008. The peace movement may not be a player in power politics, but surely we represent a mandate for peace after the November 2006 election.
A majority of Americans, including three-quarters of Democrats, favor setting a deadline for bringing the troops home in the coming year. Our military presence only deepens the hostility of the 80 percent of Iraqis who are against the occupation. Setting a deadline should be accompanied by political negotiations and a diplomatic offensive to best manage the difficult transition ahead.

It is shocking that the Bush Administration should defy the will of the voters by considering a so-called "surge" in Baghdad, which only means more bloody house-to-house carnage.

* The peace movement will call on Congress to deny any funding for such a "surge".
* We support a diplomatic peace initiative based on declaring a timetable for withdrawal, peace talks with the Iraqi opposition, and diplomatic engagement with the international community, including countries in the region.
* We oppose continued funding of the status quo through the $100 billion supplemental request.

Congress now has the opportunity to fund a transition to peace, not further war. We expect the Congress to launch open, thorough and critical hearings on the supplemental request for funding of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

We believe that differences about the speed of bringing our troops home should be publicly debated and put to up-or-down floor votes so that the public can know where its representatives stand. The different approaches should include:

* an immediate cut off of supplemental funding;
* funding contingent on a six-month or one-year withdrawal;
* funding contingent on beginning withdrawal in six months;
* funding contingent on implementing the Baker-Hamilton proposals.

No more should die in what everyone recognizes as an unwinnable war. While we believe a deadline for speedy withdrawal is the most responsible approach, we demand that Congress begin 2007 by the funding of peace, not a rubber stamp for another year of pointless killing.

We will be marching and lobbying in Washington on the weekend of January 27, representing new mandate for peace. We will be requesting that our voices be heard in Congressional hearings. We will throw ourselves into grass-roots organizing and outreach in every corner of every contested Congressional and Senate district in 2008, and into the presidential primary states to insist on leaders who will end this war. Those who ignore the November 2006 mandate by continuing the killing will face an even greater wrath of the voters in the coming election.

Read More...

Summary only...

Lieberman Party Now in Hands of Critic

myway.com
Lieberman Party Now in Hands of Critic
By STEPHEN SINGER

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) - The party Sen. Joe Lieberman created to mount his independent re-election campaign has been seized by one of his critics, and the secretary of state's office said Wednesday that it won't challenge the takeover.

After the senator's Nov. 7 victory under the Connecticut for Lieberman Party banner, John Orman switched his party affiliation from Democrat to Connecticut for Lieberman and voted himself chairman.

Orman, a political science professor who ran briefly against Lieberman last year, said only critics, bloggers and anyone named Lieberman can join the party, which he said would be a watchdog of the senator's actions.

Ted Bromley, a lawyer for the secretary of the state's office, said it won't take a stance on the legitimacy of Orman's leadership. He said the issue could be settled by a judge, but only if it's challenged in court.

Lieberman campaign manager Sherry Brown did not immediately return a phone message seeking comment Wednesday.

Lieberman was defeated in the Democratic primary by Ned Lamont, a multimillionaire in his first run for public office who harshly criticized the incumbent's support for the Iraq war. But state election laws allowed Lieberman to run in the general election as an independent and ultimately win a fourth term.

Orman had bitterly protested Lieberman's creation of the party, saying it was a ploy to secure a better position on the ballot. In Connecticut, minor party candidates are listed on the ballot before unaffiliated party candidates.

Orman said he hopes to keep the Connecticut for Lieberman party active and endorse a Senate candidate in 2010.

Read More...

Summary only...

Murtha: Extensive Hearings on Iraq

Huffington Post
Rep. John Murtha
Extensive Hearings on Iraq

I will be recommending to the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense that we begin extensive hearings starting on January 17, 2007 that will address accountability, military readiness, intelligence oversight and the activities of private contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan.

We will be demanding substantive answers to questions that have gone unanswered for far too long.

The war in Iraq and its effect on our military and our nation's future remains the most crucial issue facing the new Congress. I will be will be recommending an aggressive pursuit of action that will allow us to reduce our military presence in Iraq at the soonest practicable date.

Read More...

Summary only...

Louisiana Probes Mayor-Elect's Shooting Death

Louisiana Probes Mayor-Elect's Shooting Death

WESTLAKE, La. (AP) -- State police on Wednesday began investigating the shooting death of the man who would have been this town's first black mayor, after his family questioned local officials' conclusion that he killed himself.

The Calcasieu Parish sheriff and coroner say Gerald "Wash" Washington shot himself in the chest Saturday, three days before he was to begin his term as mayor of Westlake, a majority-white town of 4,500. But some family members said the investigation was far from adequate.

"He was an elected official, but these people have done zero to find out what happened," Washington's son Geroski Washington told The American Press of Lake Charles on Tuesday.

Col. Henry Whitehorn, head of Louisiana State Police, and detectives met with the family Wednesday as they took over the investigation, a state police news release said.

The parish coroner, Dr. Terry Welke, said Washington was shot once and the gun barrel had been "pressed tight to his skin" - something often found in suicides.

Washington's daughter Germaine Washington-Broussard said Tuesday her father's pickup truck was given back to the family just hours after his body was found. She said deputies did not take fingerprints from the truck, check ballistics on the gun found near her father's body or complete an ownership check of the gun.

Sheriff Tony Mancuso said he was confident in the investigative work done by his staff. He also said the family turned down his initial offer, on Monday, to turn the case over to state police, but called back Tuesday to say that was what they wanted.

The Westlake City Council has asked retiring Mayor Dudley Dixon to stay on until a successor is named. The council set a special election for March 31 to fill Washington's term.

Read More...

Summary only...

Nixon Vowed to 'Ruin Foreign Service'

Lake County Record Bee
Nixon Vowed to 'Ruin Foreign Service'
By GEORGE GEDDA
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Embittered by career diplomats during his first term, President Nixon said he wanted to "ruin the Foreign Service" before leaving office, according to newly released State Department documents.

Days after his re-election on Nov. 7, 1972, Nixon vented his frustrations about the diplomatic corps during a meeting with his national security adviser, Henry Kissinger.

Just before saying he was going "to take the responsibility for cleaning up" the department, the president told Kissinger on Nov. 13 that he was determined that his "one legacy is to ruin the Foreign Service. I mean ruin it - the old Foreign Service - and to build a new one. I'm going to do it."

Months later, Kissinger would become the chief U.S. diplomat as secretary of state, and major changes were never made to the Foreign Service.

Earlier, Nixon had questioned the loyalty of career diplomats to his policies and particularly was outraged by the State Department's performance on international economic policy.

"I don't know of one man, a soul that's worth a goddamn as an economic adviser. Not one. Not one at all," Nixon said at a White House meeting on Jan. 18, 1972, the documents said.

The documents shed new light on the tensions between the Republican administration and the State Department's permanent foreign policy establishment.

It was a period dominated by dramatic developments overseas - the winding down of U.S. involvement in Vietnam, the beginning of a relationship with China and the continuing Cold War standoff with the Soviet Union.

Winston Lord, a top aide to Kissinger during the 1970s, said Nixon looked on the Foreign Service as dominated by liberals and as generally "cautious, unimaginative, slow-moving and risk-averse."

He said Nixon was given to hyperbole and his "extreme" comments about dismantling the Foreign Service should be seen in that light. At times, he said Kissinger simply ignored instructions from Nixon that Kissinger felt were given out of pique instead of careful consideration.

During the early years of Nixon's presidency, Kissinger dominated foreign policy, causing friction with the marginalized secretary of state, William P. Rogers, a longtime Nixon friend.

According to the documents, Nixon disagreed with Kissinger on both Rogers' intelligence and the worthiness of the career diplomatic corps.

"Henry says Bill is dumb - not smart. He is wrong. Bill is smart as hell. Bill is not a clown," Nixon said at the January 1972 meeting.

As for State Department officials, Nixon said he has "much more suspicion of them and much more contempt for them than he (Kissinger) has."

When Rogers was informed shortly after the 1972 election that he was being relieved of his duties, he protested to Nixon that it would look like he was being forced out by Kissinger. Nixon relented and permitted Rogers an elegant exit after Kissinger's appointment to replace him nine months later.

Kissinger, notified that Rogers was being allowed a grace period, responded that it was "a disaster for the P (president) and the country and unworkable for the administration and our foreign policy," the documents show.

"Our problem is not the Foreign Service, it's the secretary and he operates independently of the White House, won't carry out orders and won't do the work, the preparation of his own materials," Kissinger is quoted as saying.

---

On the Net:

State Department documents:

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/frus/nixon/ii/

Read More...

Summary only...

Florida Democrat Appeals Court Ruling

Lake Country Record Bee
Fla. Democrat Appeals Court Ruling

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) -- Democrat Christine Jennings asked an appeals court Wednesday to overturn a ruling that denied her access to the programming code for electronic voting machines used in Sarasota County in the November election.

Jennings wants experts to examine the programming to determine if the machines somehow failed to count votes in the congressional race in which she was running against Republican Vern Buchanan.

The state declared Buchanan the winner of the race to replace Katherine Harris by 369 votes and he is scheduled to be sworn in Thursday.

But Jennings is seeking to have the election results thrown out because about 18,000 ballots cast on the touchscreen machines in the county didn't record a vote for Congress. The state - and Buchanan - assume that those people, nearly 15 percent of voters, chose to skip the race. Jennings alleges that many tried to vote but their votes weren't counted.

Circuit Judge William Gary ruled last week that Jennings' allegations amounted to conjecture and she had no right to violate the trade secrets of the company that made the voting machines, Election Systems & Software, by examining the programming code.

The First District Court of Appeal, where the appeal was filed, has no timeline for ruling on the case.

Read More...

Summary only...

First Muslim in U.S. Congress to use historic Koran once owned by Thomas Jefferson

Reuters
First Muslim in U.S. Congress to use historic Koran

CHICAGO (Reuters) - The first Muslim elected to the U.S. Congress, attacked for planning to use the Koran at his swearing-in instead of a Bible, will use a copy of the Muslim holy book once owned by Thomas Jefferson, an official said on Wednesday.

Representative-elect Keith Ellison, a Minnesota Democrat, requested the 18th century copy of the Koran for the unofficial part of his swearing in on Thursday, according to Mark Dimunation, chief of rare books and special collections at the Library of Congress in Washington.

Ellison, a Muslim convert who traces his U.S. ancestry to 1741, wanted a special copy of the book to use, Dimunation said, and approached the library for one.

The third U.S. president, serving from 1801 to 1809, Jefferson was a collector with wide-ranging interests. His 6,000-volume library, the largest in North America at the time, became the basis for the Library of Congress.

Ellison, elected in November, initially came under attack in the blogosphere and by at least one conservative radio commentator after he said he would use the Koran in his unofficial ceremony.

Members are sworn in to the U.S. House of Representatives as a group with no Bibles or other books involved; but in a country where three out of every four people consider themselves Christians, the Bible has traditionally been used in ensuing unofficial ceremonies.

These unofficial events among other things provide each member with a photo opportunity for themselves and their constituents.

Rep. Virgil Goode, a Virginia Republican who represents the area where Jefferson lived, was one of those who criticized Ellison for wanting to use the Koran, calling for strict immigration policies specially crafted to keep Muslims out of the United States.

The English translation of the Koran from Jefferson's collection dates to the 1750s. Jefferson sold his collection to the U.S. Congress after its library was lost when the British burned the Capitol during the War of 1812. Much of his collection was destroyed in an ensuing fire in 1851 but the Koran that Ellison will use survived, Dimunation said.

Ellison, a native of Detroit, will be one of 42 blacks in the House next term. There will be one black U.S. senator.

Read More...

Summary only...

Democrats may bend budget rule for tax fix

Reuters
Democrats may bend budget rule for tax fix
By Richard Cowan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The House of Representatives plans to pass rules this week to reduce U.S. budget deficits, but a senior Democrat on Wednesday said he was open to bending those rules to fix a tax that otherwise will hit growing numbers of middle-income households.

Rep. John Spratt of South Carolina, the incoming chairman of the House Budget Committee, said Democrats might decide to waive new budget rules so that Congress can keep upper middle-class taxpayers from getting caught by a tax originally intended for the wealthy.

Under the new budget rules called "paygo," spending increases or tax cuts would have to be paid for with savings elsewhere in the budget or tax code. But that could make it harder for Democrats to keep their promise to eliminate deficits in five years while providing tax relief for the middle class.

Over the next several years, an estimated 20 million to 30 million middle-class taxpayers whose incomes rise with inflation could be forced to pay the alternative minimum tax, even though it was intended to prevent the very wealthy from using exemptions to avoid paying taxes.

Congress has approved a series of temporary fixes for the tax that was first enacted in 1969, but put off any permanent resolution because of its huge impact on the budget. Democrats say a more permanent fix for the AMT would cost the Treasury about $641 billion over 10 years.

Spratt said that under rules the new Democratic House majority plans to pass on Friday, there will be no exemptions to paygo. But he added, "That's not to say that you couldn't come back later in a budget resolution and have some sort of a dispensation from the rule for a certain-sized tax cut."

Republicans, including President George W. Bush's budget chief, Rob Portman, oppose the paygo rule, saying it will only encourage Congress to pass tax increases to reduce deficits.

"It's a plan to raise taxes, plain and simple," said Rep. Paul Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican and senior Budget Committee member.

Instead, Republicans say the government collects enough tax revenue and they want deficit cuts to be achieved by paring domestic spending. But over the past several years, while they controlled both houses of Congress, domestic spending rose significantly.

For fiscal 2006, which ended on September 30, the budget deficit was $247.7 billion.

Read More...

Summary only...

FBI Details Possible Detainee Abuse

apnews.myway.com
FBI Details Possible Detainee Abuse
By MATT APUZZO

WASHINGTON (AP) - FBI agents documented more than two dozen incidents of possible mistreatment at the Guantanamo Bay military base, including one detainee whose head was wrapped in duct tape for chanting the Quran and another who pulled out his hair after hours in a sweltering room.

Documents released Tuesday by the FBI offered new details about the harsh interrogations practice used by military officials and contractors when questioning so-called enemy combatants.

The reports describe a female guard who detainees said handled their genitals and wiped menstrual blood on their face. Another interrogator reportedly bragged to an FBI agent about dressing as a Catholic priest and "baptizing" a prisoner.

Some military officials and contractors told FBI agents that the interrogation techniques had been approved by the Defense Department, including directly by former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.

The documents were released in response to a public records request by the American Civil Liberties Union, which is suing Rumsfeld and others on behalf of former military detainees who say they were abused. Many of the incidents in the FBI documents have already been reported and are summarized in the ACLU's lawsuit.

Defense Department spokesman Lt. Cmdr. Joe Carpenter said the issues raised in the report are not new. A dozen reviews of detention operations have found no policies that condone abuse, he said.

President Bush signed legislation in October that authorized aggressive interrogation tactics but did not define them. ACLU lawyer Jameel Jaffer said the documents show that stricter congressional oversight is needed.

"If you just authorize in a vague way, there's no end to the abusive methods the interrogators will come up with," Jaffer said.

The records were gathered as part of an internal FBI survey in 2004 and are not part of a criminal investigation.

The agency asked 493 employees whether they witnessed aggressive treatment that was not consistent with the FBI's policies. The bureau received 26 positive responses, including some from agents who were troubled by what they saw.

"I did observe treatment that was not only aggressive but personally very upsetting," one agent wrote, describing seeing a man left in a 100-degree room with no ventilation overnight. "The detainee was almost unconscious on the floor with a pile of hair next to him. He had apparently literally been pulling his own hair out throughout the night."

Another agent said he heard several "thunderclaps" then saw a detainee lying on the floor with a bloody nose. Interrogators told the agent the man was upset and had thrown himself to the floor.

In one report, an agent said he saw a detainee draped in an Israeli flag in a room with loud music and strobe lights. A note on the report said the Israeli flag "may be over the top but not abusive." The words "may be" were then crossed out and replaced with "is."

Carpenter, the Pentagon spokesman, said the Guantanamo detainees "include some of the world's most vicious terrorist operatives."

"The Department of Defense policy is clear," Carpenter said. "We treat detainees humanely. The United States operates safe, humane and professional detention operations for enemy combatants who are providing valuable information in the war on terror."

The FBI reports do not say whether any laws were broken. They said nothing employees observed rose to the level of abuse seen at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

FBI spokesman Richard J. Kolko said all the information in the reports were passed on to the Pentagon's inspector general.

A federal judge is considering whether to allow the ACLU's lawsuit against Rumsfeld to go forward. Government officials are normally shielded from personal lawsuits related to their jobs.

---

On the Net:

Copies of the documents can be found at:

http://foia.fbi.gov/foiaindex/guantanamo.htm

Read More...

Summary only...

Pat Robertson predicts a terrorist attack on the United States will result in "mass killing" late in 2007

Yahoo! News
Pat Robertson predicts 'mass killing'

In what has become an annual tradition of prognostications, religious broadcaster Pat Robertson said Tuesday God has told him that a terrorist attack on the United States would result in "mass killing" late in 2007.

"I'm not necessarily saying it's going to be nuclear," he said during his news-and-talk television show "The 700 Club" on the Christian Broadcasting Network. "The Lord didn't say nuclear. But I do believe it will be something like that."

Robertson said God told him during a recent prayer retreat that major cities and possibly millions of people will be affected by the attack, which should take place sometime after September.

Robertson said God also told him that the U.S. only feigns friendship with Israel and that U.S. policies are pushing Israel toward "national suicide."

Robertson suggested in January 2006 that God punished then-Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon with a stroke for ceding Israeli-controlled land to the Palestinians.

The broadcaster predicted in January 2004 that President Bush would easily win re-election. Bush won 51 percent of the vote that fall, beating Democratic Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts.

In 2005, Robertson predicted that Bush would have victory after victory in his second term. He said Social Security reform proposals would be approved and Bush would nominate conservative judges to federal courts.

Lawmakers confirmed Bush's 2005 nominations of John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. But the president's Social Security initiative was stalled.

"I have a relatively good track record," he said. "Sometimes I miss."

In May, Robertson said God told him that storms and possibly a tsunami were to crash into America's coastline in 2006. Even though the U.S. was not hit with a tsunami, Robertson on Tuesday cited last spring's heavy rains and flooding in New England as partly fulfilling the prediction.

Read More...

Summary only...

Only four big U.S. cities ready for crisis: NYC is NOT one of them

Reuters
Only four big U.S. cities ready for crisis: report

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - More than five years after the September 11 attacks, only four big U.S. cities have emergency communications allowing police, fire and medical officials to coordinate fully during a crisis, a federal report said.

The Department of Homeland Security report, due to be released officially on Wednesday, listed Washington, D.C.; San Diego, California; the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area of Minnesota; and Columbus, Ohio, as the major urban areas that achieved "most advanced" status.

The study awarded the same status to the smaller metropolitan areas of Sioux Falls, South Dakota, and Laramie, Wyoming.

Portions of the report obtained by Reuters said federal officials surveyed the emergency communications systems of 75 urban and metropolitan areas.

New York City, which was hardest hit by the 2001 attacks that killed 3,000 people, did not appear among those with the most advanced systems. Neither did Chicago, another city seen as a potential target.

The report ranked Chicago in the early stages of communications development and cited political divisions between the city and surrounding Cook County as the reason.

The inability of police and fire officials to communicate during the September 11 attacks was blamed for the deaths of New York City firefighters despite a police warning when the World Trade Center towers began to collapse.

The September 11 commission, which investigated the attacks, recommended "interoperability" of the communications systems of urban emergency services.

The new Homeland Security report said 75 urban and metropolitan areas have policies governing interoperability. But it said leadership and planning have lagged and emergency services in some areas were still in need of regular training.

Homeland Security awarded most-advanced status to areas that have standard procedures for interoperable communications, proven familiarity with the equipment during emergencies and a strategic plan for meeting further communications goals.

Read More...

Summary only...

New UN chief keeps distance from death penalty ban

Reuters
New UN chief keeps distance from death penalty ban
By Evelyn Leopold

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon started his first day on the job on Tuesday by departing from the traditional U.N. opposition to the death penalty, saying nations can make their own decision.

Ban, a former South Korean foreign minister succeeding Kofi Annan of Ghana, was greeted by a U.N. honor guard, went to a U.N. meditation chapel to honor fallen peacekeepers, spoke to reporters and held a mass meeting with U.N. staff.

Asked about the weekend execution of Saddam Hussein, Ban said the former Iraqi leader committed "heinous crimes and unspeakable atrocities against the Iraqi people and we should never forget the victims of these crimes."

But he said "the issue of capital punishment is for each and every member state to decide" and in conformity with international law.

South Korea is among 68 nations that retain the death penalty, although Seoul is considering abolishing it.

Groups such as Human Rights Watch have criticized the execution of Saddam, saying it was imposed after a "deeply flawed trial" with political interference. Annan and leading U.N. rights officials also have opposed capital punishment, as has the European Union.

The U.N. special representative in Iraq, Ashraf Qazi, released a statement on Sunday saying the world body "remains opposed to capital punishment, even in the case of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide."

Ban's new spokeswoman, Michele Montas of Haiti, said "the U.N. policy still remains that the organization is not for capital punishment." She said Ban's comments were nuanced but would not say whether he agreed with Qazi.

While Ban, 62, intends to make a fresh start, he is being pressured by the United States, Britain, France and others for control of key departments -- as were his predecessors.

EXPECTED APPOINTMENTS

Sir John Holmes, Britain's ambassador to France, is expected to head the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, formerly run by Jan Egeland, who resigned last month and returned to Norway, U.N. sources said.

The Times of London accused British Prime Minister Tony Blair of cronyism for championing a personal friend and said Holmes had little experience, compared with Egeland, in relief work.

It is uncertain what post the United States will get. Washington had been interested in the peacekeeping department but most envoys believe Jean-Marie Guehenno of France will stay on the job, at least for the time being.

The United States for years held the management and administration department, which is now expected to go to Alicia Barcena, a Mexican biologist and environmentalist who served as Annan's chief of staff.

Ban's main message to the staff was that "morale has plummeted" in recent years when the bureaucracy was the target of harsh criticism.

"Not all the criticisms are justified but some of them warrant our urgent attention and we must take bold steps to dispel them," he said.

Ban also told reporters the crisis in Sudan's Darfur region was "very high on my agenda" and that he would meet with his special envoy Jan Eliasson of Sweden on Wednesday morning.

Ban said he would attend an African Union summit at the end of January in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, and talk there with Sudan's President Omar Hassan al-Bashir.

The United Nations is seeking to get a peacekeeping force in Sudan's arid Darfur region, where violence has escalated and more than 2.5 million people have lost their homes. Bashir has put conditions on a U.N. peacekeeping force to bolster the under-financed 7,000 African Union troops now in Darfur.

Read More...

Summary only...

New Jersey panel urges abolition of death penalty

Reuters
New Jersey panel urges abolition of death penalty
By Jon Hurdle

PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - New Jersey's death penalty should be abolished because it fails to deter murderers, burdens the state financially and is inconsistent with evolving standards of decency, a legislative panel said on Tuesday.

The New Jersey Death Penalty Study Commission, set up last year by state lawmakers to assess if capital punishment should be kept, argued the death penalty should be replaced with life imprisonment in a maximum-security jail without parole.

The 13-person panel -- representing police, prosecutors, public defenders, the judiciary and families of murder victims -- found the death penalty does not achieve its goal of deterring the worst murders, and that the legal costs of it outweigh those of keeping a criminal in prison for life.

New Jersey, where nine people are currently on death row, conducted its last execution in 1963 and then suspended its death penalty because of uncertainty about the views of the U.S. Supreme Court, which reinstated capital punishment in 1976. New Jersey's current death penalty law dates from 1982.

Thirty-eight of the United States' 50 states have the death penalty -- all use lethal injection except Nebraska which uses the electric chair.

But Florida suspended its death penalty in December after a botched lethal injection led to a man taking 34 minutes to die, while in California last month a federal judge said the state's lethal injection methods caused an "undue risk" of pain "so extreme" that it may violate a constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

Making life imprisonment the ultimate penalty in New Jersey would ensure public safety and the rights of murder victims' families, while removing the risk of executing someone in error, the 133-page report said.

"The penological interest in executing a small number of persons guilty of murder is not sufficiently compelling to justify the risk of making an irreversible mistake," the report said.

It recommended that any cost savings from abolishing the death penalty should be used to provide benefits and services for the families of murder victims.

Reed Gusciora, a Democratic assemblyman, welcomed the commission's "well reasoned" recommendations and said there is a "very good" chance they will become law in the Democrat-controlled legislature.

Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine said in a statement that as an opponent of the death penalty, he looked forward to working with the legislature to implement the panel's recommendations.

But Republican Assemblyman Guy Gregg said he was "surprised and shocked" at the commission's "arbitrary opinion" against a penalty that he argued should be allowed to continue for the worst crimes. Gregg noted that voters approved a constitutional amendment in favor of capital punishment in 1992.

Read More...

Summary only...

New York governor unveils agenda to revive upstate

Reuters
New York governor unveils agenda to revive upstate

NEW YORK (Reuters) - New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer on Tuesday announced a series of initiatives to spark economic development upstate, including a three-year, $6 billion property tax reduction plan.

On his second day in office, the Democratic governor unveiled "The Renew New York Agenda," which also includes more state aid to upstate schools and to distressed upstate cities and towns.

Details of these and other initiatives will be provided later this month in the executive budget presentation for fiscal 2008, which begins on April 1, according to a statement by the governor.

"We are making a commitment at the start of the new administration to do something about a long-standing problem that affects millions of New Yorkers," Spitzer said in the statement.

Spitzer said there has been a decades-long decline in upstate New York, which has lost numerous manufacturing jobs.

To reverse the decline, he promised to put into effect the three-year, $6 billion property tax reduction plan, which targets most benefits to middle-class people who have been leaving the region.

During the last decade, the upstate has lost more than 30 percent of young people between the ages of 25 and 34, according to the governor's statement.

Spitzer's property tax relief plan follows a similar proposal by state Senate Republicans unveiled last week. The Republicans want to provide $6 billion in tax relief over the next two years.

The governor said his administration will also expand state aid to municipalities, but added that the new aid will be tied to critical belt-tightening measures to ensure long-term fiscal stability. He promised to significantly increase investment in education for distressed cities and towns under a new school-aid formula.

Other measures include appointing an economic development chair for the upstate, helping small businesses by reducing workers compensation and health care costs, creating a fund for stem cell and other research, and launching an initiative to provide universal broadband Internet access.

Read More...

Summary only...

Videographer of Saddam Execution

Newsweek.com
Exclusive: Videographer of Saddam Execution
In a NEWSWEEK exclusive, the man hired to videotape Saddam Hussein’s execution recalls the brutal dictator’s humble final moments.
WEB EXCLUSIVE
By Michael Hastings
Newsweek

Dec. 30, 2006 - Ali Al Massedy was 3 feet away from Saddam Hussein when he died. The 38 year old, normally Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's official videographer, was the man responsible for filming the late dictator's execution at dawn on Saturday. "I saw fear, he was afraid," Ali told NEWSWEEK minutes after returning from the execution. Wearing a rumpled green suit and holding a Sony HDTV video camera in his right hand, Ali recalled the dictator's last moments. "He was saying things about injustice, about resistance, about how these guys are terrorists," he says. On the way to the gallows, according to Ali, "Saddam said, ‘Iraq without me is nothing.’"

Ali says he followed Saddam up the gallows steps, escorted by two guards. He stood over the hole and filmed from close quarters as Saddam dropped through—from "me to you," he said, crouching down to show how he shot the scene. The distance, he said, was "about one meter," he said. "He died absolutely, he died instantly." Ali said Saddam's body twitched, "shaking, very shaking," but "no blood," he said, and "no spit." (Ali said he was not authorized to disclose the location, and did not give other details of the room.)

Ali said the videotape lasts about 15 minutes. When NEWSWEEK asked to see a copy, Ali said he had already handed the tape over to Maliki's chief of staff. "It is top secret," he said. He would not give the names of officials in attendance, though he estimates there were around 20 observers. One of them, Iraqi National Security Adviser Mouwaffak al-Rubaie, told CNN that Saddam clasped a Koran as the noose was tied around his neck, and refused to wear a hood. He also said that government officials had not decided whether or not to release the videotape. The execution reportedly took place at 6:05 a.m. local time. Prime Minister Maliki did not attend.

Ali was greeted as a hero when he returned from the execution a little after 7 a.m., flying in with other officials and landing in two helicopters in the Green Zone. A convoy of 20 or so GMCs and Toyota Land Cruisers waited outside to drive some of the Iraqi officials home.

The Iraqi bodyguards, mostly Shiites they said, had passed the time smoking and praying—some prayed on cardboard mats on the street.

It was a cold morning in Baghdad, a few degrees above freezing, and in the post dawn light the guards' breaths could be seen in the air. When the thudding of helicopters began, the body guards rushed towards the entrance to the landing zone. They swarmed around Ali, snapping digital pictures on camera phones and cheering. "Saddam finished, Saddam finished," a guard who gave his name as Mohammed told NEWSWEEK. Ali looked somewhat stunned as he exited, carrying the camera.

"All Iraqis will be happy," he says. "This is the most important day for me [as a cameraman,]" he said. "This page [in history] is over, this page is over. All Iraqis will be happy from the north to the south to the east to the west." One of the judges who presided over the execution then came out to the street; Ali jumped in a car with him. The convoy of SUVs drove off, one after the other, with the occasional honk of the horn.

Read More...

Summary only...

Fineman: The Saga of Saddam and the Bushes

Newsweek.com
Fineman: The Saga of Saddam and the Bushes
By Howard Fineman
Newsweek

Jan. 8, 2007 issue - Evil was on the loose in the world, President George W. Bush had told the country, and on his first Thanksgiving in office—November 2001—he was on his way to Fort Campbell in Kentucky to dine with newly trained troops heading out to fight the (evil) Taliban in Afghanistan. In the conference room aboard Air Force One, we talked about evil. "Is Saddam evil?" I asked. Glancing across the table at his aides, he demurred. I asked again; again, a demurral. We went on to other topics. Several exchanges later, Bush interrupted an answer to blurt out a declaration: "By the way, Saddam is evil!"

When the history is written, the saga of the Bushes and the Butcher of Baghdad will be a central thread of the family's story—and of America's at the millennium. It is not personal in the literal sense; neither President Bush ever met Saddam. True, intelligence sources (not all of them necessarily reliable) said Saddam tried to have Bush 41 killed in 1993. And in 2002, drumming up support for the approaching second gulf war, Bush Two called Saddam the "guy who tried to kill my dad." Still, there is no evidence that the Bushes loathed Saddam, and I am told that Dad remains skeptical about the purported assassination plot. "It's not like 'the Hatfields and McCoys'," says a family friend who doesn't want to risk his relationship being quoted by name.

But it is "the Realists and the Neocons." For both Bushes, dealing with Saddam became a way to measure presidential manhood—and to express profoundly different views about the world.

For Bush One, manhood meant a hard-boiled (critics said cynical) restraint. He always made it his business to know all things geopolitical, long before—and certainly after—he took over as head of the CIA. As Ronald Reagan's vice president, he hewed to the CIA view of Saddam, which was that, as sadistic as he was, he had his uses as a counterweight to fundamentalist Iran. When Saddam turned bellicose in 1989, Saudi friends advised the new president to ignore him. Only when Saddam invaded Kuwait did Bush crank up the rhetoric—branding him "another Hitler"—but that was not really Bush One's style. When advisers told him to tone down the apocalyptic language, he did, even as he shrewdly led the Coalition forces that ousted Saddam from Kuwait.

The Hitler reference stuck, however, and it had consequences. Scholars say that it diminished Bush One, and hurt his popularity among conservatives. If Saddam indeed was another Hitler, should Bush not have gone to Baghdad to take him out? That was an argument the Neocons made throughout the '90s, and made to Bush Two as he went through his precampaign tutorials in Austin in 1999. That, together with the younger Bush's evangelical Christian faith, made Saddam an inviting target. Bush Two had little understanding of the nuances of the Middle East, which his father had spent a lifetime learning, and Bush Two had a lack of interest bordering on contempt for diplomatic nuance. He viewed it as a lack of will, of confidence, of power.

That was his father's game. He would play another.

Those close to the family say there is little evidence that father and son have ever had a detailed discussion about the Iraq war—either before it began or since. When Bush Two visited his father in Kennebunkport, Maine, at the start of the 2000 campaign, he said that if he did not win, he would have a lot more time to go fishing with his dad. Father and son may yet get their chance for fishing trips. They will both be relieved that Saddam is gone, but I bet that the subject won't come up.

Read More...

Summary only...

Edwards terms Iraq surge "McCain doctrine"

Reuters
Edwards terms Iraq surge "McCain doctrine"
By Jim Wolf

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards, targeting a potential Republican rival in 2008, dubbed plans for a short-term U.S. troop increase in Iraq "the McCain doctrine," in an interview aired on Sunday.

Sen. John McCain of Arizona, considered likely to be a Republican candidate for president, has been "the most prominent spokesperson for this for some time," Edwards said in an early salvo of the 2008 campaign.

Edwards, a former senator who was the Democratic vice presidential nominee in 2004, made his remarks in an interview on the ABC News program "This Week."

"I actually, myself, believe that this idea of surging troops, escalating the war -- what Senator McCain has been talking about -- what I would call now the McCain doctrine ... (is) dead wrong," said Edwards.

The former senator from North Carolina launched his run for the White House on Thursday with a call to withdraw 40,000 to 50,000 troops from Iraq, about one-third of the current force, to spur Iraqis to quell their own mounting communal violence.

Edwards is the third candidate to jump formally into a Democratic race in which he may have to compete for funds and support with leading prospective contenders, Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois.

McCain, a front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination in public opinion polls, long has urged sending more U.S. troops to or else face "sooner or later, our defeat in Iraq."

Such an increase should not be characterized as "short-term," he said in a December 6 statement marking the release of the final report by the Iraqi Study Group, a bipartisan panel that recommended changes in U.S. strategy in and around Iraq.

"Our troops should be sent to Baghdad -- or anywhere else in Iraq -- in order to complete a defined mission, not to serve until some predetermined date passes," McCain said at the time.

A McCain spokeswoman did not return a call seeking comment on Edwards' remarks.

President George W. Bush is expected to announce a strategy shift in Iraq in a matter of days, possibly including an increase of 15,000 to 30,000 combat troops, chiefly to try to end sectarian fighting and stop death squads in Baghdad.

Another Democrat seeking his party's presidential nomination, Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack, said a surge of U.S. troops would "make a big mistake even bigger."

"I believe that the generals are right. We've got to put responsibility where it belongs, in the Iraqis," he added in an interview on "Fox News Sunday."

Read More...

Summary only...

Iraqi Officials Report 16,273 Deaths in 2006; Enraged Crowds Protest Hanging of Saddam Hussein

ABC News
16,273 Deaths Reported in Iraq in 2006
Iraqi Officials Report 16,273 Deaths in 2006; Enraged Crowds Protest Hanging of Saddam Hussein
By LAUREN FRAYER
The Associated Press

BAGHDAD, Iraq - As enraged crowds protested the hanging of Saddam Hussein across Iraq's Sunni heartland Monday, government officials reported that 16,273 Iraqi civilians, soldiers and police died violent deaths in 2006, a figure larger than an independent Associated Press count for the year by more than 2,500.

The tabulation by the Iraqi ministries of Health, Defense and Interior, showed that 14,298 civilians, 1,348 police and 627 soldiers were killed in the violence that raged in the country last year.

The Associated Press accounting, gleaned from daily news reports from Baghdad, arrived at a total of 13,738 deaths. The United Nations has said as many as 100 Iraqis die violently each day, which translates into 36,500 deaths annually.

In Samarra, a mob broke the locks off a bomb-damaged Shiite shrine and marched through carrying a mock coffin and photo of the dictator.

The demonstration in the Golden Dome, shattered in a bombing by Sunni extremists 10 months ago, suggests that many Sunni Arabs may now more actively support the small number of Sunni militants fighting the country's Shiite-dominated government. The Feb. 22 bombing of the shrine triggered the current cycle of retaliatory attacks between Sunnis and Shiia, in the form of daily bombings, kidnappings and murders.

Monday's protest came on a day that saw the U.S. military kill six Iraqis during a raid on the offices of a prominent Sunni political figure, who was suspected of giving al-Qaida in Iraq fighters sanctuary.

Until Saddam's execution Saturday, most Sunnis sympathized with militants but avoided taking a direct role in the sectarian conflict despite attacks by Shiite militia that have killed thousands of Sunnis or driven them from their homes. The current Sunni protests, which appear to be building, could signal a spreading militancy.

Sunnis were not only outraged by Saddam's hurried execution, just four days after an appeals court upheld his conviction and sentence. Many were also incensed by the unruly scene in the execution chamber, captured on video, in which Saddam was taunted with chants of "Muqtada, Muqtada, Muqtada."

The chants referred to Muqtada al-Sadr, a firebrand Shiite cleric who runs one of Iraq's most violent religious militias. He is a major power behind the government of Shiite Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

Many Sunnis are also upset that Saddam was put to death the day that Sunni celebrations began for Eid al-Adha, a major Muslim festival. The judge who first presided over the case that resulted in Saddam's death sentence said the former dictator's execution at the start of Eid was illegal according to Iraqi law, and contradicted Islamic custom.

The law states that "no verdict should implemented during the official holidays or religious festivals," said Judge Rizgar Mohammed Amin, a Kurd.

Rizgar presided over Saddam's trial on charges he killed 148 Shiite men and boys in Dujail, north of Baghdad, in a botched assassination attempt in 1982. The judge was removed from the case after Shiite complaints that he was too lenient.

In a Sunni neighborhood in northern Baghdad, hundreds of demonstrators mourned the executed leader. Some praised the Baath Party, the outlawed nationalist group that under Saddam cemented Sunni Arab dominance of Iraq.

"The Baath party and Baathists still exist in Iraq, and nobody can marginalize it," said Samir al-Obaidi, 48, who attended a Saddam memorial in the Azamiyah neighborhood.

In Dor, 77 miles north of Baghdad, hundreds more took to the streets to attend the dedication of a giant mosaic of Saddam. Children carried toy guns and men fired real weapons into the air.

Mourners at a mosque in Saddam's hometown of Tikrit slaughtered sheep as a sacrifice. The mosque's walls were lined with condolence cards from tribes in southern Iraq and Jordan who were unable to travel to the memorial.

Saddam's eldest daughter briefly attended a protest Monday in Jordan her first public appearance since her father was hanged.

"God bless you, and I thank you for honoring Saddam, the martyr," said Raghad Saddam Hussein, according to two witnesses. She addressed members of the Professional Associations an umbrella group of unions representing doctors, engineers and lawyers in the group's office parking lot in west Amman.

In the midst of the protests, U.S. forces continued operations in Iraq.

Six Iraqis were killed in a U.S.-led raid on the Baghdad offices of a top Sunni politician, Saleh al-Mutlaq. The U.S. military and Iraqi police said they suspected the offices were being used as an al-Qaida safe house.

Al-Mutlaq is a senior member of the National Dialogue Front, which holds 11 of the 275 seats in Iraq's parliament.

U.S. forces said they took on heavy fire from automatic weapons and rocket-propelled grenades as they sought to enter the building. Ground troops were backed by helicopters that "engaged the enemy with precision point target machine gun fire," the military said.

It was unclear whether the deaths resulted from the ground assault or fire from U.S. helicopters.

Associated Press Television News footage showed masses of rubble in the area and what appeared to be a long smear of blood where a body had been dragged across the floor of one of the buildings.

Walls were pitted with what appeared to be bullet and shrapnel holes.

The U.S. death toll, meanwhile, climbed to at least 3,002 by the final day of 2006 as the American military reported the deaths of two more soldiers in an explosion Sunday in Diyala Province, northeast of the capital. With the announcement, the Associated Press count of fatalities showed that at least 113 U.S. service members died in December. That makes it bloodiest month of 2006.

Iraqi authorities Monday reported that 16,273 Iraqis including 14,298 civilians, 1,348 police and 627 soldiers died violent deaths in 2006. The total exceeds the Associated Press count by more than 2,500.

On the first day of the New Year, Iraqi Police reported finding the 40 handcuffed, blindfolded and bullet-riddled bodies in Baghdad. A police official, who refused to be named out of security fears, said 15 of the bodies were discovered in the mainly industrial Sheik Omar district of northern Baghdad.

An Iraqi worker for the Algerian Embassy in Baghdad was shot to death, police said.

Also Monday, the Iraqi government raided and sealed the offices of a privately owned television station, charging it had incited violence and hatred in its programming. In its coverage of the execution of Saddam over the weekend, a newscaster had worn black mourning clothes.

The satellite television channel Al-Sharqiya, which broadcasts from Dubai, remained on the air late Monday. The station is owned by Saad al-Bazzaz, a one-time chief of radio and television for Saddam.

Read More...

Summary only...

A 'Surge' Faces Trouble In the Senate; Even in GOP, Few Back the President

washingtonpost.com
A 'Surge' Faces Trouble In the Senate
Even in GOP, Few Back the President
By Robert D. Novak

Sen. John McCain, leading a blue-ribbon congressional delegation to Baghdad before Christmas, collected evidence that a "surge" of more U.S. troops is needed in Iraq. But not all his colleagues who accompanied him were convinced. What's more, he will find himself among a dwindling minority inside the Senate Republican caucus when Congress reconvenes this week.

President Bush and McCain, the front-runner for the party's 2008 presidential nomination, will have trouble finding support from more than 12 of the 49 Republican senators when pressing for a surge of 30,000 troops. "It's Alice in Wonderland," Sen. Chuck Hagel, second-ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, told me in describing the proposal. "I'm absolutely opposed to sending any more troops to Iraq. It is folly."

What to do about Iraq poses not only a national policy crisis but profound political problems for the Republican Party. Disenchantment with George W. Bush within the GOP runs deep. Republican leaders around the country, anticipating that the 2006 election disaster would prompt an orderly disengagement from Iraq, are shocked that the president now appears ready to add troops.

The recent McCain congressional delegation was composed of sophisticated lawmakers who have made many previous visits to Iraq. They do not minimize the severity of sectarian civil war. They left their meeting with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki doubting any "sense of urgency" after advising him that he must disarm the militias. They recognize that the national police, corrupt and riddled with radicals, constitutes an unmitigated disaster.

McCain has long called for more troops in Iraq. He was supported within the delegation by his ally Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.) and by Sen. Joseph Lieberman, the only Democrat on the delegation (though he now calls himself an "Independent Democrat" after losing the Democratic nomination in Connecticut and being elected with Republican votes). But Sen. John Thune (S.D.) calls his support for the surge "conditional." Sen. Susan Collins (Maine) returned from Baghdad opposing more troops. Rep. Mark Kirk of Illinois, the only House member on the trip, is described as skeptical.

How big and how long should a surge be? The 7,000 or 8,000 troops that were first mentioned now have grown to at least 30,000. Congressional advocates talk privately about an infusion of manpower ending about halfway through this year. But retired general Jack Keane, who has become a leading advocate of additional troops, wrote in The Post last week: "Increasing troop levels in Baghdad for three to six months would virtually ensure defeat."

I checked with prominent Republicans around the country and found them confused and disturbed about the surge. They incorrectly assumed that the presence of Republican stalwart James Baker as co-chairman of the Iraq Study Group meant it was Bush-inspired (when it really was a bipartisan creation of Congress). Why, they ask, is the president casting aside the commission's recommendations and calling for more troops?

Even in Mississippi, the reddest of red states, where Bush's approval rating has just inched above 50 percent, Republicans see no public support for more troops. What is happening inside the president's party is reflected by defection from support for his war policy after November's election by two Republican senators who face an uphill race for reelection in 2008: Gordon Smith of Oregon and Norm Coleman of Minnesota. Coleman announced his opposition to the idea after returning from a trip to Iraq that preceded McCain's.

Among Democrats, Lieberman stands alone. Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden, as Foreign Relations Committee chairman, will lead the rest of the Democrats not only to oppose a surge but to block it. Bush enters a new world of a Democratic majority where he must share the stage.

Just as the president is ready to address the nation on Iraq, Biden next week begins three weeks of hearings on the war. On the committee, Biden and Democrats Christopher Dodd (Conn.), John Kerry (Mass.), Russell Feingold (Wis.) and Barack Obama (Ill.) will compete for intensity in criticizing a troop surge. But on the Republican side of the committee, no less probing scrutiny of Bush's proposals will come from Chuck Hagel.

Read More...

Summary only...

25% of the Country is Certifiably Insane

Huffington Post
Cenk Uygur
25% of the Country is Certifiably Insane

The Associated Press and AOL recently did a year end poll where they asked people to make predictions on 2007. There were some interesting findings, like the fact that there are more Americans who think that the draft will be reinstated next year (35%) than those who think we will withdraw our forces from Iraq (29%).

There are also numbers that showed how well the public is attuned to the current political and economic climate, with eighty percent predicting an increase in the minimum wage and ninety percent predicting higher gas prices.

But there is one number that stands out among the rest as absolutely unbelievable. Twenty-five percent of Americans believe that Jesus Christ will return to earth in 2007. TWENTY-FIVE PERCENT! IN 2007!

These people are nuts. There's no polite way of saying it. If I sound superior, too bad. Sanity has its advantages.

If some of the famed cultural warriors of the right want to take me on and defend their cherished Christian cohorts, step on up. I'll take every one of them on and win very, very easily.

Here's my plan for victory - wait till 2008. When Jesus doesn't come - again, for the 2,007th time - I will be proven right. Will the people who believed he was coming in 2007 change their minds? Of course not. They'll just say he's coming in 2008. And on and on it goes.

He isn't coming! I will make any wager, pay any price and do any act that anyone demands of me if I am proven wrong. Here it is, a simple challenge: Name your price, in money, actions, deeds or words - and I will pay it if I am wrong. If Jesus comes in 2007, you win. If he doesn't, I win.

I am not going to ask that any of the believers wager anything in return. I am not going to do a Terrell Owens like celebration when I win. I am not going to ask for my pound of flesh. The only thing I ask for when the cultural warriors of the right lose this bet is that they look into counseling.

You people are seriously disturbed. You think a magic man is going to appear out of the sky and grant you eternal bliss. If the man's name was anything other than Jesus, that belief would get you locked up as a psychotic. And the fact that you have given him this magic name and decided to call him your Lord doesn't make it any more sane.

Imagine for a second if instead of Jesus, some psycho was waiting for a magical creature named Fred to come save him this year and suck him up into the sky. Now, who doesn't think that man needs serious counseling and perhaps medical supervision? Now, you change Fred into Jesus, and you have 25% of the country.

Sometimes the world scares me. It is full of psychotics who go around pretending to be rational human beings. You think that's offensive, then prove me wrong. I dare you. Show me Jesus in 2007 and I'll do whatever you demand of me.

Read More...

Summary only...

For Congress, January Means More Work, Fewer Junkets

For Congress, January Means More Work, Fewer Junkets
By KIMBERLY HEFLING
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The January junket to warmer climates, a postholiday tradition of sorts for some members of Congress, could be headed to the wayside. An accelerated work schedule set up by the new Democratic leadership has put a halt on many January excursions funded by lobbyists. Given that Democrats are taking over the House and Senate in part because of GOP ethics scandals, some lawmakers are fearful of the voters' wrath anyway if they go on the trips.

"I think members are looking more closely at privately funded travel, and I think ... many of them are being careful and avoiding it," said Rep. Charles Dent, R-Pa.

The last time members had to work much of January was 1995, when a newly Republican-led House took control, recalled Todd Hauptli, senior executive vice president of the American Association of Airport Executives.

For the past 21 years, except for 1995, his organization paid for members to fly to Hawaii to discuss airline issues at a conference. This January, members are declining the offer and will participate by videotape.

"They can't really be scooting around the country when Congress is in session," Hauptli said.

Members also will be missing out this January on attending the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, where TiVo digital video recorders and Nintendos first were introduced. The Consumer Electronics Association spent thousands last year sending a few members and their staffs to the show, where they stayed in the Bellagio Hotel and Casino.

An Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers spokesman said the group does not expect any lawmakers to use hotel rooms reserved for them in January at a hotel near the annual Detroit auto show, where new cars and technologies are showcased. Instead, the group is encouraging members to attend the Washington auto show later in the month, said Charles Territo, an association spokesman.

"We'll continue to look at other ways to educate members of Congress," Territo said.

Attention surrounding the excesses of disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who is now in federal prison, brought the practice of lobbyist-funded travel to light. Abramoff defrauded American Indian tribe clients of millions of dollars while arranging lavish trips and meals for public officials.

Former Rep. Bob Ney of Ohio, who resigned this year after pleading guilty to corruption, was one lawmaker who participated in an Abramoff-sponsored trip that included transport on a $92,000 chartered jet to Scotland for a golf outing.

After the scandal broke, privately funded travel expenditures by members dropped from $3.6 million in 2005 to about $1.4 million in 2006, according to PoliticalMoneyLine, which tracks campaign spending.

Both the House and Senate passed changes in lobbying laws and rules in 2006 under Republican leadership, but neither chamber voted to ban privately funded travel altogether. The two chambers were never able to bridge their differences and produce final legislation.

Democrats have promised to tackle the issue of ethics again in 2007.

While there may be perks such as lavish meals and concerts involved in lobbyist-funded trips, some people say they can be a legitimate way for members to get exposure outside Washington.

They also say members get time away from Washington to learn about complicated issues without members getting interrupted by vote calls. Not all privately funded travel is connected to lobbyists, either. Some educational institutions fund travel.

Michael Petricone, senior vice president of government affairs of the Consumer Electronics Association, said those who attend the electronics show hear from corporate executives and can learn about timely technologies such as broadband Internet and digital television.

"If you want to promote good policy making, the last thing you want to do is lock policy makers up in the ivory tower of Washington," Petricone said.

Rep. Todd Platts, R-Pa., said there are plenty of trips that members can take without lobbyists covering the bill. Platts said he invites people to his district office if he wants to meet with them for a long time. He also has gone abroad - four times to Iraq, and two times to Afghanistan - to visit troops.

"If it's something that has any business, in relationship to your job, your job is going to pay for the travel," Platts said.

Some new members say they plan to say no to lobbyist-funded travel from the get-go.

"No matter what the rules say, it's a perception problem," said Sen.-elect Bob Casey, D-Pa.

Read More...

Summary only...

Chief Justice Roberts calls for raises for judges -- Inadequate 6-figure income is a "Constitutional Crisis!"

[Editors Note: Probably most readers of The Truth About Political Stuff would consider a 6-figure income a very nice salary!]

Chief Justice John Roberts Is Calling on Congress to Increase Salaries of Federal Judges

By PETE YOST
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Pay for federal judges is so inadequate that it threatens to undermine the judiciary's independence, Chief Justice John Roberts says in a year-end report critical of Congress.

Issuing an eight-page message devoted exclusively to salaries, Roberts says the 678 full-time U.S. District Court judges, the backbone of the federal judiciary, are paid about half that of deans and senior law professors at top schools.

In the 1950s, 65 percent of U.S. District Court judges came from the practicing bar and 35 percent came from the public sector. Today the situation is reversed, Roberts said, with 60 percent from the public sector and less than 40 percent from private practice.

Federal district court judges are paid $165,200 annually; appeals court judges make $175,100; associate justices of the Supreme Court earn $203,000; the chief justice gets $212,100.

Thirty-eight judges have left the federal bench in the past six years and 17 in the past two years.

The issue of pay, says Roberts, "has now reached the level of a constitutional crisis."

"Inadequate compensation directly threatens the viability of life tenure, and if tenure in office is made uncertain, the strength and independence judges need to uphold the rule of law - even when it is unpopular to do so - will be seriously eroded," Roberts wrote.

Legislation languished in Congress in 2006 that would have provided a 16 percent increase in federal judges' salaries. The bill was introduced by Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein of California, Patrick Leahy of Vermont and John Kerry of Massachusetts.

Leahy, incoming chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said Roberts "is right that the issue of judicial compensation relations to the issue of the independence of the judiciary." Leahy said the chief justice "has tackled a touchy but timely topic that has been a chronic sticking point between the judicial and legislative branches."

Over the past 16 years, Congress has provided the judiciary occasional cost-of-living adjustments, but Roberts said the absence of salary increases is "grievously unfair."

Leahy pledged "to do what I can to convince Congress to fairly evaluate this issue and the chief's arguments so that we can see what solutions may be possible."

It is the first time in the two-decade history of year-end reports by Roberts and his predecessor, the late William Rehnquist, that the chief justice's message has focused entirely on a single subject.

Roberts said the judiciary will not properly serve its constitutional role if it is restricted to people so wealthy that they can afford to be indifferent to the level of judicial compensation, or to people for whom the judicial salary represents a pay increase.

There are "very good judges" in both of those categories, said Roberts, but a judiciary drawn more and more from only those categories "would not be the sort of judiciary on which we have historically depended to protect the rule of law in this country."

"It changes the nature of the federal judiciary when judges are no longer drawn primarily from among the best lawyers in the practicing bar," Roberts wrote.

The number of cases filed in the Supreme Court increased for the court's 2005 term, according to an appendix to the report. Supreme Court case filings rose by more than 1,000 to 8,521 from the previous term. Appeals court filings dropped by 3 percent to 66,618 in 2006 compared with 2005.

In federal district courts, the number of criminal cases filed in 2006 declined by 4 percent to 66,860 cases and 88,216 defendants, due to changing priorities directing more resources to combating terrorism.

The civil caseload rose 2 percent to 259,541.

Excluding a jump in asbestos-related cases which totaled 18,179, the civil caseload fell by 4 percent.

---

On the Net:

Supreme Court: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/

Read More...

Summary only...

Journalists From Prominent News Organizations May Be Called to Testify in CIA Leak Case

Journalists From Prominent News Organizations May Be Called to Testify in CIA Leak Case
By MATT APUZZO
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Some journalists who made careers out of questioning government officials and bearing witness to history may soon find themselves answering questions from prosecutors as key witnesses in the CIA leak case.

Ten or more reporters from some of the most prominent news organizations could be called to testify in the perjury and obstruction case of former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. It's rare enough for reporters to become witnesses. But the Libby case is even more unusual because journalists will be dueling witnesses - some called by the defense team, some by prosecutors.

"It will be unprecedented and, as far as I'm concerned, horrifying," Lucy Dalglish, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, said of the case, for which jury selection begins in two weeks.

Prosecutors want to show that Libby lied to investigators about his conversations with journalists regarding outed CIA officer Valerie Plame, and they are expected to rely on former New York Times reporter Judith Miller, Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper and NBC Washington bureau chief Tim Russert to make their case.

Libby, the former top aide to Vice President Dick Cheney, has said he had no reason to lie and simply didn't remember those conversations. His attorneys have said they will call as many as seven unidentified journalists to testify about their conversations with Libby to bolster his case.

The Libby case has rankled news agencies for nearly three years, since Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald began subpoenaing journalists to testify before a grand jury. Fitzgerald said it was the only way he could thoroughly investigate whether any laws were broken.

After a lengthy court fight that included an 85-day jail term for Miller, Fitzgerald won cooperation from journalists. When Libby was indicted, it was clear reporters would be key witnesses.

That puts them in the awkward position of aiding a criminal investigation, something journalism groups say erodes the wall between the government and an independent press.

Plame's identity was first revealed by syndicated columnist Robert Novak. She believes she was outed as retribution for her husband's criticism of the Bush administration's prewar intelligence on Iraq.

Jurors likely won't hear much about the leak itself because the original source, former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, has already confirmed his role and Libby is not charged with the leak. But the trial is certain to renew questions about whether the administration used reporters to drum up support for the war.

Roy Peter Clark, a scholar at the Poynter Institute, a school and resource center for working journalists, said he worries about the fallout from the trial. If it's perceived that reporters grant anonymity to officials engaged in political gamesmanship, prosecutors might be more likely to subpoena them in cases where anonymity was granted in serious issues of public importance.

"This case, it's magnified by the fact that it's in Washington and the status of the players," Clark said. "It's a bizarre and I'd say dangerous case."

Justice Department policies require prosecutors to exhaust other remedies before sending subpoenas to reporters, and each decision is reviewed by the attorney general, although U.S. investigators and prosecutors occasionally have violated these rules. In the past 15 years, only 13 media subpoenas have been granted involving confidential sources, Deputy Attorney General Paul J. McNulty told Congress in September.

"This record reflects restraint," he said. "We have recognized the media's right and obligation to report broadly on issues of public controversy and, absent extraordinary circumstances, have committed to shielding the media from all forms of compulsory process."

Libby's attorneys have not publicly named the reporters they expect to be defense witnesses. Two reporters have said they will fight subpoenas, but defense attorney William Jeffress said he expects that will be resolved before trial. Because Libby is calling them to testify about his own conversations with reporters, Jeffress said there should be no confidentiality concerns.

President Bush did not include Libby on his list of pre-Christmas pardons, and the Justice Department said he does not have a pending pardon application on file.

Read More...

Summary only...

Your Support Requested

Thank you for reading/subscribing to The Truth About Political Stuff. To help sustain this valuable source of information in the coming year, please be kind enough to take a moment and click on a "Make Donation" button and make a donation.
Thank you.

Read More...

Summary only...

Alt. WW2

Read More...

Summary only...

There's No Egg!

Read More...

Summary only...

A Gift

Read More...

Summary only...

We Want To Vote

Read More...

Summary only...

Reform?

Read More...

Summary only...

"I Feel Good"

Rest In Peace

Read More...

Summary only...