MY POV

IF YOU'RE NOT OUTRAGED, YOU'RE NOT PAYING ATTENTION!

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Benjamin Franklin

How Bush really feels about you.

The Mars Society

Satire has never served a better purpose. Go see.
Before they cart us off to the camps.

"...The Fascist State organizes the nation, but leaves a sufficient margin of liberty to the individual; the latter is deprived of all useless and possibly harmful freedom, but retains what is essential; the deciding power in this question cannot be the individual, but the State alone...."

Benito Mussolini

"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country... Corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money-power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed."

Abraham Lincoln
November 12, 1864

"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided man."

Martin Luther King Jr., 1963

"CORPORATION, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility."

Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary

"The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe in blood for centuries."

James Madison
(1751-1836)
4th President of the United States

"Wherever they burn books they will also, in the end, burn human beings."

Heinrich Heine
Almansor, 1823

"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."

Sir Winston Churchill
(1874-1965)

"Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war: neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.

Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

Hermann Goering, Nazi Reichsmarschall

"Authoritarian societies inevitably crumble because they silence the critics who could save them from errors of blind hubris. Dissent is not a luxury to be indulged in the best of times, but rather an obligation of free people, particularly when the very notion of dissent is unpopular."

Robert Scheer

"FASCISM: a system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership together with belligerent nationalism."

American Heritage Dictionary

Cowardice asks the question - is it safe?
Expediency asks the question - is it politic?
Vanity asks the question - is it popular?
But conscience asks the question - is it right?
And there comes a time when one must take a position that is
neither safe, nor politic, nor popular; but one must take it
because it is right.

Dr. Martin Luther King

"My life is my message."

Gandhi

Posted: 31 March 2005

This pretty much sums up my feelings for the day.

Mr. Magoo Flying America into Disaster

As the Iraq War drags on and the economy languishes, Bush attempts to fix what is not broken and ignores what needs to be fixed.
By Regis T. Sabol

How many Americans, I wonder, have been paying any attention to what's going on in Iraq?
While George Bush, Donald Rumsfeld & Co. continue to assure us that democracy is on the march in the Middle East because we invaded Iraq based on a confederacy of lies, the truth is that things are not going well over there and they are most likely going to get worse. They most certainly are not going to get any better.

Even as the news media spoon feeds us the latest tabloid installments of Scott Peterson, Robert Blake, Michael Jackson, and the pathetic circus surrounding Terri Shiavo, here's what's happening in the real world: Iraqi collaborators and innocent civilians are being blown up or gunned down willy-nilly in unconscionable numbers; American soldiers continue to die in a bloody trickle that is now approaching 1,600 body bags; more than 11,300 American troops have been wounded, many of them maimed for life. The wounded return home to find that funds for VA care they desperately need have been cut.

There's more: The Shiites, Kurds, and Sunnis are bickering over who gets to run Iraq in a struggle that, despite what Rumsfeld says, could very well lead to a civil war in which our military would be caught in the middle; polls show that the vast majority of Iraqis want us out of their country (Similar polls show that most Americans want us out of Iraq); and Army recruiters cannot meet their recruiting goals for the regular army, the army reserve or the National Guard. It seems that most young Americans have no desire to experience the thrill of combat or the distinct chance of being gunned down or blown up.

And while Bush continues to trumpet Afghanistan as a success story for American-exported democracy, U.S. troops are still dying there and the country's president is little more than the mayor of Kabul, the nation's capital, since the warlords, Al Qaeda and the Taliban control the rest of the country and have turned Afghanistan into the largest opium exporter in the world. (You'll note that Laura Bush's visit to Afghanistan matched her husband's Thanksgiving visit to the troops in Iraq for its photo-op brevity.) And we still can't find that pesky Osama bin Laden. Remember him? So much for success.

Meanwhile at home, while Bush continues his monomaniacal obsession with dismantling Social Security and his myopic refusal to accept that global warning is real, our gluttonous oil consumption is destroying our economy, and the carbon dioxide and other pollutants, such as mercury, that we continue to spew into the air, earth, and water are literally killing us.

READ THE REST.

From Grist on-line magazine.

Comprehensive assessment of world's ecosystems released; be very afraid

The largest and most comprehensive assessment of the world's ecosystems ever undertaken was released today, and the results constitute a "stark warning" that "the ability of the planet's ecosystems to sustain future generations can no longer be taken for granted," according to the 45-member board of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. The study was written by 1,360 experts from 95 countries, including government officials, scientists, members of civil-society groups and indigenous tribes, and industry representatives, under the rubric of the U.N. Environment Program, using widely agreed-upon scientific evidence. It warns of rapid decline in biodiversity and freshwater availability, and says the likelihood of disease outbreaks (a la SARS), "dead zones" in coastal waters, and destructive climate shifts will rise sharply in the coming 50 years. It recommends means of slowing some of the damage -- developing markets for freshwater, improving forestry practices, removing some agricultural subsidies -- but stresses that none of those means are yet being applied.

straight to the source: The Philadelphia Inquirer, Seth Borenstein, 30 Mar 2005

straight to the source: Scripps Howard News Service, Joan Lowy, 29 Mar 2005

straight to the source: The Washington Post, Shankar Vedantam, 30 Mar 2005

From The Center for American Progress

CORRUPTION – DELAY ALLY PART OF ANOTHER INQUIRY: Already under investigation for extorting millions of dollars from Indian tribes in return for access to prominent conservative politicians, AP reports Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff "was at the center of an earlier inquiry that said his firm hadn't justified roughly $1.2 million it charged the Northern Mariana Islands." Abramoff, who has traded on his ties to President Bush and House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX), was the lead lobbyist for Seattle-based Preston Gates & Ellis when it worked on behalf of the islands to keep them free from certain federal labor and immigration laws during the last half of the 1990s. One audit concluded that about $1.2 million in government payments to Preston Gates was "not adequately supported." The charges included travel, telephone, photocopy, computer research, outside-professional fees and "$2,000 for a June 1996 golf tournament."

SUPREME COURT – TITLE IX PROTECTS WHISTLEBLOWERS: In apparent retaliation for his complaints about the inferior conditions under which the girls' basketball team played and practiced, Coach Roderick Jackson was fired by an Alabama high school. In a close ruling, the Supreme Court has now ruled that Jackson and other whistleblowers are protected under Title IX, the 1972 federal law that prohibits sex discrimination in schools and colleges that receive federal funding, whose scope of protections had previously been considered unclear. Advocates of Title IX are seeing the ruling as "a decisive victory," particularly the strong and clear language of the majority opinion – "Retaliation against a person because that person has complained of sex discrimination is another form of intentional sex discrimination" – which upheld that "protections extend beyond those who are themselves the victims … applying as well to third parties who complain about sex discrimination on behalf of others."

SCHIAVO – CONGRESSIONAL INTERVENTION UNCONSTITUTIONAL: Terri Schiavo is finally at rest today. And yesterday, another piece of the controversy surrounding the end of her life was put to rest as well, when a federal appellate judge ruled that the Congressional intervention in the Terri Schiavo case was unconstitutional. Judge Stanley F. Birch Jr., a conservative Republican appointed by George H. W. Bush, wrote: "A popular epithet directed by some members of society, including some members of Congress, toward the judiciary involves the denunciation of 'activist judges.' Generally, the definition of an 'activist judge' is one who decides the outcome of a controversy before him according to personal conviction, even one sincerely held, as opposed to the dictates of the law as constrained by legal precedent and, ultimately, our Constitution. In resolving the Schiavo controversy it is my judgment that, despite sincere and altruistic motivation, the legislative and executive branches of our government have acted in a manner demonstrably at odds with our Founding Fathers' blueprint for the governance of a free people – our Constitution."

MILITARY – EXTENDED DEPLOYMENTS TAKING THEIR TOLL: Extended operations in Iraq are taking their toll on U.S. soldiers. A new study by the New England Journal of Medicine reveals "as many as one out of four veterans of Afghanistan and Iraq treated at Veterans Affairs hospitals in the past 16 months were diagnosed with mental disorders." Though VA hospitals are currently able to provide mental health care for these soldiers, the numbers are steadily on the rise and hospitals may soon be "overwhelmed" if they come in the numbers predicted. Furthermore, though many of the patients "often lack insurance," there have been "large funding cuts in VA psychiatry programs over the past several years." Combining the health insurance and funding woes with the fact that there are a limited number of trained doctors available "could signal big trouble ahead." Vast improvements in psychiatric care as well as early detection of cases provide hope that there will be better rates of recovery than in the days of Vietnam.

CORRUPT ESTABLISHMENT – HOMELAND NEPOTISM: President Bush has nominated the vice president's son-in-law, Philip Perry, as general counsel of the Homeland Security Department, where he will oversee 1,500 lawyers who work on legal matters such as Coast Guard maritime laws and immigration. Perry currently works on the other side of that fence: he's a lobbyist with the law firm Latham & Watkins, where he was a lobbyist for Lockheed Martin, one of the top contractors for Homeland Security. While he was lobbyist, the company won hundreds of millions of dollars in government money for homeland security services and products. Perry has made a nice career out of marrying the vice president's daughter, this being his third Bush administration appointment. Before his current stint as a lawyer and Lockheed Martin lobbyist, Perry was general counsel of the White House Office of Management and Budget and, before that, acting associate attorney general at the Justice Department. Apparently, it's not a bad career move to be related to the vice president. Elizabeth Cheney, Perry's wife, was appointed by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice last month to be the second-ranking U.S. diplomat for the Mideast. Cheney's other daughter, Mary, on Tuesday signed with Bush strategist Mary Matalin's conservative imprint at Simon & Schuster to pen a book on being "a political target for the other side."

SCIENCE
Stem Cell Triumph

In a significant victory for science, the Massachusetts state Senate yesterday overwhelmingly passed a bill which would give scientists more freedom in conducting stem cell research. The legislation, proposed by Massachusetts Senate President Robert Travaglini, would promote stem cell research in the state. It also outlawed human reproductive cloning (the creation of cloned babies) and put in place a series of new regulations. Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, however, is threatening to veto the legislation. His opposition puts him "at odds with some of the top university and research facilities in Massachusetts." Here are the facts:

THE BUSH BAN: The lack of freedom in stem cell research has been a huge problem since August 2001, when President Bush bowed to the far, far right and limited all federally approved stem cell research to the lines which had already been established. Under his plan, no money could be spent on creating new lines. The problems with this myopic approach were quickly apparent. First, although President Bush claimed more than 60 lines were available, in reality, there were only a handful of viable lines. Second, all of the lines Bush approved turned out to be contaminated with mouse cells, making them unable to ever be used in human medical therapies. Third, thousands of embryonic cells which could be used for research are simply destroyed every year; about 400,000 unused embryonic cells are awaiting incineration after being created, then not used for in vitro fertilization. And finally, refusing to allow the federal government to be involved in research also means there is no government oversight. Even the conservative Leon Kass, the chairman of the President's Council on Bioethics, has said, "It is a Pyrrhic victory to keep the federal government out of certain activities, if the price of such a stance means that worse practices are allowed to proceed without oversight or regulation in the private sector."

THE PROMISE: Embryonic stem cells are a cluster of about 150 cells (called a "blastocyst") which form a few days after the joining of an egg and a sperm. The resulting mass is no bigger than the period at the end of this sentence. Within the center of the cluster are stem cells, which scientists believe have the potential to become any of the cells that make up the human body. Scientists believe these cells hold the key for one day treating a slew of diseases and injuries, such as spinal injuries, Alzheimer's, strokes, Parkinson's, diabetes, brain injuries and heart defects. The cells already have shown they can "produce druglike compounds that can help ailing organs repair themselves." They've also shown promise as "biological pacemakers," correcting heart rhythms. And new studies by private researchers at Advanced Cell Technology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine and the University of Chicago found stem cells could reproduce the cones and rods in the eyes, successfully reversing some blindness.

NO ATTACK OF THE CLONES: Romney is basing his opposition on therapeutic cloning. In a blitz of radio ads yesterday, he charged the legislation was a "radical cloning bill." He's wrong. The technique, better known as "somatic cell nuclear transfer," is simply a procedure in which the nucleus of an adult cell is inserted into an unfertilized egg cell, causing it to divide. Stem cells are then gathered from the new group of cells. (Researchers strongly support the technique, because it allows them to sharpen their focus on particular diseases and create stores of cells for particular patients.) The egg is never fertilized and thus could never become an actual person. Far from allowing human cloning, the Massachusetts legislation provides strong and specific safeguards against abuses like the ones Romney is using to stir up public apprehension. Any scientist caught experimenting with human cloning, for example, will face a $1 million fine and a 10-year prison term.

FEDERAL RESPONSIBILITY: In the next two to three months, the House of Representatives will allow a vote to loosen the restrictions on stem cell research which were put in place by President Bush in August 2001. Last year, a bipartisan group of 206 House members signed letters asking Bush to reverse his faulty policy; so did 58 senators. Reps. Mike Castle (R-DE) and Diana DeGette (D-CO) have introduced two bills (which have hundreds of co-sponsors) which would support the more liberal use of federal funds and allow the use of leftover embryos from in vitro fertilization. The bills also would enact the first federal ethics rules for the research. So far, the House leadership has kept the legislation from getting either a hearing or a vote. There is also a Senate version to support stem cell research, introduced by Sens. Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Tom Harken (D-IA), which many experts believe would have enough votes to pass, should it ever make it to a vote. (Senate leader Bill Frist has said it is likely he would allow a vote should the House version pass.)

SWEEPING THE NATION: Other states across the country are stepping up to fill the funding and responsibility vacuum left by Bush's ban. In November, California citizens voted to spend $3 billion over the next decade on stem cell research. And just this week the Maryland House of Representatives passed a bill to set aside $25 million every year for stem cell research, although conservatives in the Senate are threatening a filibuster. Connecticut is poised to allow $10-20 million; Wisconsin may set aside $750 million.

SOCIAL SECURITY
Extreme Spin

Don't let yesterday's surprise speech on democracy by President Bush, surprise press conference by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld or surprise trip to Afghanistan by First Lady Laura Bush distract you. The Bush administration's taxpayer-funded Social Security privatization road show (a.k.a. Bamboozlepalooza) continues. Today is day 28 of the 60-day tour and things aren't going well for the president. A poll by Time Magazine released yesterday revealed just 31 percent of Americans approve of the way Bush is handling the Social Security issue, while 58 percent disapprove. As a result, the administration and its allies are resorting to extreme measures to put a positive spin on their privatization efforts.

BOUNCERS IN DENVER: Although everyone finances the president's Social Security road show with their tax dollars, not everyone is welcome at the "town hall" events. Three Denver residents report "they were forcibly removed from one of President Bush's town meetings on Social Security because they displayed a bumper sticker on their car condemning the administration's Middle East policies." According to the White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, the person who removed them was a volunteer staff member who was concerned "they might try to disrupt the event." The three individuals "said nothing and did not sport T-shirts or signs criticizing the president or his policies." McClellan added, "There is plenty of opportunity outside of the event to express their views."

BLACK LISTS IN FARGO: What happened in Denver was not an isolated incident. Before a February event in Fargo, North Dakota, "more than 40 residents were placed on a "black list" of people who were not to receive tickets because they had expressed opposition to Bush's policies." The White House also blamed this incident on "an over-eager volunteer." Since "volunteers" around the country seem to behave similarly, a reporter asked Scott McClellan yesterday what "marching orders" are given to people at the door by the administration. McClellan replied, "I don't know. I'll be glad to look into it and see what else I can find. I don't know if there's formal marching orders, as you referred to them."

SUPPRESSING TRANSCRIPTS OF CHENEY EVENTS: Vice President Cheney participated in two "townhall" events last Thursday – one in Battle Creek, Michigan, and one in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Contrary to its standard practice, the White House has not released the transcripts. Press coverage of the event suggests the reason. In Battle Creek, Cheney was joined on the stage by Rep. Joe Schwarz (R-MI) who said before the event that "he was not convinced that allowing personal retirement accounts will help solve the problem." At the Pittsburgh event, "Cheney pointed to the experience of federal workers who have the option of placing part of their retirement savings in somewhat similar accounts." But Kim Miller, a resident of Mt. Lebanon, PA, "said that she had been a federal employee and invested in the Thrift Savings Plan, 'and I didn't do well at all.'" Cheney's Social Security events from last Monday and Tuesday, which apparently were more under control, are available on the White House website.

Posted: 29 March 2005

The American Inquisition has begun. This makes me sick.

Michigan Preparing To Let Doctors Refuse To Treat Gays

(Lansing, Michigan) Doctors or other health care providers could not be disciplined or sued if they refuse to treat gay patients under legislation passed Wednesday by the Michigan House.

The bill allows health care workers to refuse service to anyone on moral, ethical or religious grounds.

The Republican dominated House passed the measure as dozens of Catholics looked on from the gallery. The Michigan Catholic Conference, which pushed for the bills, hosted a legislative day for Catholics on Wednesday at the state Capitol.

The bills now go the Senate, which also is controlled by Republicans.

The Conscientious Objector Policy Act would allow health care providers to assert their objection within 24 hours of when they receive notice of a patient or procedure with which they don't agree. However, it would prohibit emergency treatment to be refused.

Three other three bills that could affect LGBT health care were also passed by the House Wednesday which would exempt a health insurer or health facility from providing or covering a health care procedure that violated ethical, moral or religious principles reflected in their bylaws or mission statement.

Opponents of the bills said they're worried they would allow providers to refuse service for any reason. For example, they said an emergency medical technicians could refuse to answer a call from the residence of gay couple because they don't approve of homosexuality.

Rep. Chris Kolb (D-Ann Arbor) the first openly gay legislator in Michigan, pointed out that while the legislation prohibits racial discrimination by health care providers, it doesn't ban discrimination based on a person's sexual orientation.

"Are you telling me that a health care provider can deny me medical treatment because of my sexual orientation? I hope not," he said.

"I think it's a terrible slippery slope upon which we embark," said Rep. Jack Minore (D-Flint) before voting against the bill.

Paul A. Long, vice president for public policy for the Michigan Catholic Conference, said the bills promote the constitutional right to religious freedom.

"Individual and institutional health care providers can and should maintain their mission and their services without compromising faith-based teaching," he said in a written statement.

Access Denied
Find out why growing numbers of doctors and pharmacists across the US are refusing to prescribe or dispense birth control pills

by Caroline Bollinger

In April, Julee Lacey, 33, a Fort Worth, TX, mother of two, went to her local CVS drugstore for a last-minute Pill refill. She had been getting her prescription filled there for a year, so she was astonished when the pharmacist told her, "I personally don't believe in birth control and therefore I'm not going to fill your prescription." Lacey, an elementary school teacher, was shocked. "The pharmacist had no idea why I was even taking the Pill. I might have needed it for a medical condition."

Melissa Kelley, 35, was just as stunned when her gynecologist told her she would not renew her prescription for birth control pills last fall.

"She told me she couldn't in good faith prescribe the Pill anymore," says Kelley, who lives with her husband and son in Allentown, PA. Then the gynecologist told Kelley she wouldn't be able to get a new prescription from her family doctor, either. "She said my primary care physician was the one who helped her make the decision." Lacey's pharmacist and Kelley's doctors are among hundreds, perhaps thousands, of physicians and pharmacists who now adhere to a controversial belief that birth control pills and other forms of hormonal contraception--including the skin patch, the vaginal ring, and progesterone injections--cause tens of thousands of "silent" abortions every year. Consequently, they are refusing to prescribe or dispense them.

Scenarios like these--virtually unheard of 10 years ago--are happening with increasing frequency. However, until this spring, the issue received little attention outside the antiabortion community. It wasn't high on the agendas of reproductive rights advocates, who have been preoccupied with defending abortion rights and emergency contraception. But when Lacey's story was picked up by a Texas TV station and later made the national news, Planned Parenthood Federation of America and others took notice.

Limiting access to the Pill, these groups now say, threatens a basic aspect of women's health care. An estimated 12 million American women use hormonal contraceptives, the most popular form of birth control in the United States after sterilization. The Pill is also widely prescribed by gynecologists and family doctors for other uses, such as clearing up acne, shrinking fibroids, reducing ovarian cancer risk, and controlling endometriosis.

"Where will this all stop?" asks Lacey. "And what if these pharmacists decide they suddenly don't believe in a new lifesaving medicine? I don't think pharmacists should be in a position to decide these things."

READ THE REST.

From The Center for American Progress

HEALTH CARE
Patients' Rights Under Attack

In one of the "latest manifestations of the religious right's growing political reach," at least eleven states are considering or have passed laws allowing pharmacists to interfere with your medical care. Such laws would exempt pharmacists from having to fill prescriptions for birth control, emergency contraception, or any other medication they decided violated their system of personal belief, even when that refusal directly endangers a patient's health or rights. The legislative action follows a trend around the country as some pharmacists seek to impose their moral beliefs on customers, sometimes lecturing patients or even refusing to transfer prescriptions to another pharmacy "when time is of the essence." It is part of a concerted attack on reproductive rights which endangers women's health and increases the likelihood of unwanted pregnancy and abortion.

BIRTH CONTROL 'INTRINSICALLY EVIL': The most high-profile case of "religious refusal" occurred in Wisconsin, where Kmart pharmacist Neil Noesen refused to fill a university student's birth control prescription because he believed the pills were "intrinsically evil." Noesen also refused to transfer the prescription to another pharmacy. The student, who missed a day of her birth control, took Noesen to court, where Judge Colleen Baird issued a "strongly worded decision" recommending Noesen be suspended for two years, as well as required to take ethics classes, alert future employers to his beliefs and pay what could be as much as $20,000 to cover the costs of the legal proceedings. The judge said Noesen had clearly violated state regulations prohibiting pharmacists from engaging in practices which could be "a danger to the health, welfare or safety of the patient or public."

WISCONSIN CONSERVATIVES SUPPORT NOESEN: Instead of heeding the judge's recommendation and focusing on making sure pharmacists look out for the health of their customers, Wisconsin lawmakers responded with an attempt to pass a "refusal clause" that would give pharmacists the right to refuse services they don't agree with. Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin has introduced its own bill to prevent pharmacists from injecting themselves into decisions of physicians and patients.

SEIZED RECORD: Efforts to support pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions are the latest in a series of anti-choice scare tactics initiated by the Bush administration. Last year, then-Attorney General John Ashcroft tried unsuccessfully to subpoena abortion records from several Planned Parenthood affiliates as part of the government's defense of a new law barring a certain type of second-term abortion. And just last week, Planned Parenthood denounced prosecutors in Kansas and Indiana for trying to seize patient medical records from clinics, calling the actions a "coordinated attempt to intimidate health care providers and patients." In Kansas, Attorney General and "ardent abortion opponent" Phil Kline has requested the medical records of 90 women from two Kansas abortion clinics, including their "sexual history, birth control practices, prior medical and personal history, notes from the physical examinations, and a number of other things that the clinics contend are protected by the patient-physician privilege."

VALUES
A Week in the 'Culture of Life'

Contrary to the impression given by Washington conservatives and mainstream media cognoscenti, the Terri Schiavo case is not the only "culture of life" issue of concern to Americans. At least two other horrible tragedies took place last week – the second-deadliest school shooting in American history, and the deadliest day for U.S. forces in Afghanistan in nearly a year. Both deserved serious discussion, but barely managed to cut through wall-to-wall Schiavo coverage. And while pundits were busy repeating their broken-record commentary on "culture of life" politics, reality showed otherwise.

SILENCE ON RED LAKE KILLINGS: On Monday, 16-year-old Jeff Weise opened fire at his high school on the Red Lake Indian Reservation in northern Minnesota, gunning down an unarmed security guard, a teacher and five fellow students before killing himself. What was President Bush's reaction to this, the second-deadliest school shooting in America's history? Silence. For nearly a week, neither President Bush nor Education Secretary Margaret Spellings uttered a single word about the tragedy. Finally, almost a week later, the president noted the killings during his Saturday radio address. Clyde Bellecourt, a Chippewa Indian who is the national director of the American Indian Movement in Red Lake, said Bush's response came too late. "He should have been the first one to reach out to the Red Lake Indian community," he said. Instead, he was one of the last.

INACTION ON RED LAKE KILLINGS: President Bush's response stands in stark contrast to President Clinton's reaction – both rhetorically and substantively – to the Columbine massacre. Clinton "spoke to reporters on the night of the shootings," proposed specific initiatives to curb school violence during his radio address four days later, and within weeks had "summoned a broad array of interests to a White House summit on the shooting." President Bush, on the other hand, has fought to cut all funding for the $180 million program "Clinton launched after Columbine to help districts place more police officers in schools," and tried to eliminate "a $437-million program that provides grants to states to fund school antiviolence and antidrug programs." Did the Red Lake killings create a change of heart for conservatives in Washington? It doesn't appear so. House Judiciary Committee hearings urged by progressives the day after the shootings have seemingly gone nowhere, while President Bush's address on Sunday contained a single vague sentence on preventing further acts like Red Lake: "To keep our children safe and protected, we must continue to foster a culture that affirms life and provides love, and helps our young people build character."

UNPRINCIPLED ON SCHIAVO: Though President Bush's decision to abruptly end his vacation and fly to Washington to sign the Schiavo bill suggested his passion for the cause, it's worth noting how he reacted to the Asia tsunami disaster three months ago. As the Washington Post reminds us, Bush "continued to vacation, unseen and unheard [for three days], and the world may well have wondered what kind of catastrophe would be sufficient to interrupt the president's agenda of clearing brush and riding bikes." Now we know. Yet, as with Tom DeLay, polls showing widespread disapproval with federal involvement in the Schiavo case prompted a quick turnaround on President Bush's part. After flying across the country to save her life, Bush then "retreated back to his ranch and remained largely out of sight as the nation wrestled with the great moral issues surrounding the fate of Terri Schiavo." His radio address on Saturday extolling a "culture that affirms life" didn't mention Schiavo once.

FORGETTING U.S. CASUALTIES: Four U.S. national guardsmen from Indiana were killed Saturday when their vehicle struck a land mine in southeast Afghanistan. It was the deadliest day for U.S. forces in Afghanistan in nearly a year, and "highlighted the dangers still facing foreign and Afghan troops more than three years after the fall of the Taliban." Didn't hear about any of this? Hardly a surprise. A LexisNexis search of broadcast and cable news television transcripts found only seven references to the deaths in Afghanistan – two on ABC, two on NBC, and three on CNN; the average length of the reference was 32 words, about 15 seconds of airtime. During the same period, LexisNexis found 159 programs featuring discussion of the Schiavo case, with most devoting an entire segment to the issue.

BANKRUPTCY – JUDGES SPEAK OUT AGAINST BILL: The goal of the bankruptcy bill steamrolling through Congress isn't to reform the bankruptcy system, it's to destroy it. Bankruptcy judges around the country are speaking out against the legislation. Keith Lundin, a federal bankruptcy judge in the eastern district of Tennessee in Nashville said, "[t]he advocates [of the bill] aren't trying to fix the bankruptcy law; they're trying to mess it up so much that nobody can use it." Under the new law, repayment plans would be so expensive that many debtors would be unable to keep up, "forcing debtors out of bankruptcy court protection." Creditors could then "try to force debtors to pay the full amount owed — not the reduced amount a judge had ordered — by moving to repossess their belongings or bringing legal actions." As a result, "many people would have to pay creditors far into the future ... and thus be unable to restart their economic lives, a long-held aim of bankruptcy."

IRAQ – PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION ASSAILS CIA, INTELLIGENCE FAILURES: Early leaks of the Silberman report – the final intelligence analysis from the commission President Bush was forced to form in response to the Iraq WMD intelligence failures – reveal that the document will include "a searing critique of how the C.I.A. and other agencies never properly assessed Saddam Hussein's political maneuverings or the possibility that he no longer had weapon stockpiles." Though the C.I.A. bears much of the brunt of the criticisms on the "deeply flawed" assumptions made about Hussein's WMD capabilities, the Defense Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency also receive "a hearty condemnation." Some of the "assertions" championed by the president and his administration in the run up to the war, and yet to be "backed away from" by the vice president, are "particularly ridicule[d]" in the report. The report will "warn … that major obstacles remain to intelligence sharing among spy agencies" as well as make suggestions for "broad changes in the sharing of information among intelligence agencies that go well beyond the legislation passed by Congress." The classified version of the report delves into more intelligence failures when it comes to Iran and North Korea's weapons programs.

Posted: 28 March 2005

Please consider giving a donation to the First Amendment Project. They need help to keep fighting the good fight.

From Organic Consumers

MONSANTO WARNS TWO BILLION FARMERS: "STOP SAVING YOUR SEEDS" Since the advent of farming, thousands of years ago, farmers have carefully collected seeds at harvest so as to have enough seed for the next year's planting. Concerned that seed saving by farmers reduces their profits, seed and biotech giants like Monsanto have rammed though controversial "intellectual property laws" in numerous countries that make traditional seed saving a crime. Last year, Monsanto harassed and/or sued more than 500 U.S. farmers who saved their seeds, forcing them to pay the company over $15 million in fines, including up to 8 month long prison sentences. http://www.organicconsumers.org/monsanto/seedsaving031405.cfm

From Grist on-line magazine.

Bipartisan coalition presses Bush to get behind oil-use reduction

Lambasting U.S. oil addiction: It's not just for America-hating radical homosexual vegetarian Schiavo-killing eco-terrorists anymore! A growing bipartisan coalition is arguing that U.S. dependence on foreign oil is a serious national security threat. Today, a letter signed by 26 former national-security officials from both Republican and Democratic administrations is winging its way to the White House, bearing a plea for President Bush to kick off "a major new initiative to curtail U.S. consumption." "I don't often find myself in agreement with those at the Natural Resources Defense Council, but ... I do think there is common ground," said neocon Frank Gaffney, a former Reagan administration official. The letter was organized by the bipartisan Energy Future Coalition, which arose in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks to advocate for tighter fuel-economy standards and higher subsidies for alternative fuels. Auto-worker unions, automakers, and farming groups -- traditional foes of environmental groups -- are on board, perhaps more comfortable around the manly men of the national-security apparatus.

straight to the source: The Wall Street Journal, John J. Fialka and Jeffrey Ball, 28 Mar 2005 (access ain't free)

From The Center for American Progress

MILITARY – CREDITORS DO A DISSERVICE TO OUR SERVICE MEN AND WOMEN: Dating back to World War II but revised and improved as recently as December 2003, the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act is a law that "protects all active-duty military families from foreclosures, evictions, and other financial consequences of military service." Yet, right before he was about to board a plane to Iraq, Sgt. John Savage III still received a phone call from his wife stating that debt collectors were foreclosing on the family house. Despite the "broad spectrum of protections" offered by the act, more and more of our service men and women and their families are forced to face "distracting and demoralizing demands from financial companies trying to collect on obligations that, by law, they cannot enforce." Part of the reason for the problem is the "Pentagon's increased reliance on Reserve and National Guard units that do not hail from traditional military towns" – apparently, such "creditors and courts … may never have dealt with the relief act." Furthermore, the initial enforcement of the act is the duty of service members who "may not have the time or money to fight back."

STATE WATCH – LIKE BROTHER, LIKE BROTHER: For years now, Michael Vasilinda, "one of Florida's most visible television reporters," whose stories are viewed by millions, has been doing "public relations work and [providing] film editing services to more than a dozen state agencies" through his company Mike Vasilinda Productions Inc. Vasilinda and his company have been bankrolled by hundreds of thousands of dollars funneled "through contracts with Gov. Jeb Bush's office … and other government entities" with the biggest contract coming from a nearly million dollar deal to air the Florida Lottery. Though Vasilinda has tried to distance himself from comparisons to the Armstrong Williams scandal, journalism ethics professor Bob Steele pointed out, "We don't know everything he passed up, questions he didn't ask, issues he didn't explore." Furthermore, back in January, Gov. Jeb Bush's spokeswoman, who happens to have been an employee of Vasilinda before being hired by the governor's office, did not respond to requests "about whether any journalists have received money from state agencies." Though known about in the press corps, Vasilinda's contracts were never revealed to the public, leaving one cable news station manager to question, "How do you expect to look 100 percent clean if you are being paid by the government you're supposed to be covering?"

ECONOMY – BUSINESS BENEFITING FROM RIGHT-WING AGENDA: The Washington Post reports, "Fortune 500 companies that invested millions of dollars in electing Republicans are emerging as the earliest beneficiaries of a government controlled by President Bush and the largest GOP House and Senate majority in a half century." Some of the winners so far include MBNA Corp., the credit card behemoth and fifth-largest contributor to Bush's two presidential campaigns, which will benefit from the bankruptcy bill, and Exxon Mobil Corp, which will reap big profits from legislation allowing drilling in Alaska's wildlife refuge. Wal-Mart, another big contributor to Bush and his GOP allies, "recently won long-sought protections from class-action lawsuits." And don't worry, says conservative lobbyist Charles R. Black Jr., "there is more to come on that score." Bush and his congressional allies are "looking to pass legal protections for drug companies, doctors, gun manufacturers and asbestos makers, as well as tax breaks for all companies and energy-related assistance sought by the oil and gas industry."

HOMELAND SECURITY – THE PROBLEM WITH NUCLEAR POOLS: The Bush administration, taking the side of the nuclear industry, has "long defended" the safety of radioactive material in pools of water stored by commercial nuclear facilities. But a classified report by nuclear experts assembled by the National Academy of Sciences has challenged that position, concluding the government "does not fully understand the risks that a terrorist attack could pose to the pools and ought to expedite the removal of the fuel to dry storage casks that are more resilient to attack." In response to the report, the Bush administration's Nuclear Regulatory Commission has made no policy adjustments and instead sought to protect itself from embarrassment by classifying the report. Critics charge the commission's actions have amounted to a "systemic effort to withhold important information from … the public."

MEDIA – THE FOX CHIP: Really worried about your children's television watching habits? A former Republican precinct captain in Tulsa, OK, Sam Kimery, is working for you. Kimery has developed the "Fox Blocker," an ingenious device that lets parents block Fox News from their cable. "I might as well be reading tabloids out of the grocery store," said Kimery, who doesn't object to the views expressed on the channel, but contends it's "not news at all." He contends that Fox News' top-level management dictates a conservative journalistic bias, that inaccuracies are never retracted, and what winds up on the air is more opinion than news. "[They show] anything to get a rise out of the viewer and to reinforce certain retrograde notions," Kimery said.

HUMAN RIGHTS
The Sham Tribunals

In its astonishingly misguided approach to combating terrorism, the Bush administration is again letting its zeal trump American values. From conducting sham trials to blocking detainee tribunal reform efforts to turning another blind eye to abuse, recent revelations show that the Bush administration continues to systematically shun the bedrock principles of the American legal system.

THE PROBLEM WITH SECRET EVIDENCE: Murat Kurnaz is a German national who was seized in Pakistan by the United States in 2001. He was tried last fall by a special "combatant status review tribunal" that does not afford defendants the right to confront the evidence presented against them. The tribunal, based on secret evidence, found Krunaz "was a member of al Qaeda and an enemy combatant whom the government could detain indefinitely." The recently declassified evidence, however, shows that U.S. military intelligence had concluded "there was no information that linked Kurnaz to al Qaeda, any other terrorist organization or terrorist activities." The tribunal ignored that conclusion and based its entire decision on a single memo – dubbed "R-19" – written by an unidentified military official. U.S. District Judge Joyce Hens Green, who reviewed all the evidence in the case, said the R-19 memo "fails to provide significant details to support its conclusory allegations, does not reveal the sources for its information and is contradicted by other evidence in the record." Eugene R. Fidell, an expert in military law, said the Krunaz case suggests the tribunals – which have been used in approximately 540 cases – are "a sham."

CHENEY IMPEDES ATTEMPTS AT REFORM: In addition to the "status review tribunals," separate military commissions set up to prosecute foreign detainees have been subject to "widespread criticism from the federal courts, foreign governments and human rights groups." On 11/8/04, federal Judge James Robertson blocked the commissions from proceeding because "commission rules allowing the defendant to be excluded from some proceedings and denied access to some of the evidence against him were 'fatally contrary to or inconsistent with' the standards of American military and civilian courts." As a result, the Department of Defense is considering reforms which would strengthen the rights of defendants, provide more independent judges and bar confessions obtained by torture. Vice President Dick Cheney, however, is leading a small but powerful group of officials opposed to changing the procedures "unless forced to do so by the courts."

FAILURE TO TAKE MISTREATMENT OF DETAINEES SERIOUSLY: The mounting problems with the various military tribunals are part of an overarching failure of the administration to handle the treatment of detainees in a manner consistent with American values. For example, despite the recommendations from military investigators, Army officials "have decided not to prosecute 17 soldiers involved in the deaths of prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan." Overall, 27 foreign detainees were killed in U.S. custody between 2002 and 2004.

MORE ABUSE, NO MORE ACCOUNTABILITY: New documents reveal that "the abuse of prisoners in Iraq by US forces was more widespread than has been reported." Evidence released Friday reveals that an officer found detainees ''were being systematically and intentionally mistreated" in a holding facility near Mosul. Despite widespread evidence of abuse, "no one was punished ... because the investigating officer said there was not enough proof against any individual."

Posted: 27 March 2005

With the sea level rising as more and more ice melts, Florida is already on the way to being submerged. And when I read articles like this one, I can only say the sooner Florida is underwater, the better. What's next? A new version of the Scopes Monkey Trial?

Capitol Bill Aims to Control 'Leftist' Profs
By James Vanlandingham
The University of Florida Alligator

The law could let students sue for untolerated beliefs.

Tallahassee - Republicans on the House Choice and Innovation Committee voted along party lines Tuesday to pass a bill that aims to stamp out "leftist totalitarianism" by "dictator professors" in the classrooms of Florida's universities.

The Academic Freedom Bill of Rights, sponsored by Rep. Dennis Baxley, R-Ocala, passed 8-to-2 despite strenuous objections from the only two Democrats on the committee.

The bill has two more committees to pass before it can be considered by the full House.

While promoting the bill Tuesday, Baxley said a university education should be more than "one biased view by the professor, who as a dictator controls the classroom," as part of "a misuse of their platform to indoctrinate the next generation with their own views."

The bill sets a statewide standard that students cannot be punished for professing beliefs with which their professors disagree. Professors would also be advised to teach alternative "serious academic theories" that may disagree with their personal views.

According to a legislative staff analysis of the bill, the law would give students who think their beliefs are not being respected legal standing to sue professors and universities.

Students who believe their professor is singling them out for "public ridicule" - for instance, when professors use the Socratic method to force students to explain their theories in class - would also be given the right to sue.

"Some professors say, 'Evolution is a fact. I don't want to hear about Intelligent Design (a creationist theory), and if you don't like it, there's the door,'" Baxley said, citing one example when he thought a student should sue.

Rep. Dan Gelber, D-Miami Beach, warned of lawsuits from students enrolled in Holocaust history courses who believe the Holocaust never happened.

Similar suits could be filed by students who don't believe astronauts landed on the moon, who believe teaching birth control is a sin or even by Shands medical students who refuse to perform blood transfusions and believe prayer is the only way to heal the body, Gelber added.

"This is a horrible step," he said. "Universities will have to hire lawyers so our curricula can be decided by judges in courtrooms. Professors might have to pay court costs - even if they win - from their own pockets. This is not an innocent piece of legislation."

READ THE REST.

I already knew DeLay was a hypocrite and unethical bastard. This simply confirms it.

DeLay's Own Tragic Crossroads
Family of the lawmaker involved in the Schiavo case decided in '88 to let his comatose father die.

By Walter F. Roche Jr. and Sam Howe Verhovek, Times Staff Writers

CANYON LAKE, Texas — A family tragedy that unfolded in a Texas hospital during the fall of 1988 was a private ordeal — without judges, emergency sessions of Congress or the debate raging outside Terri Schiavo's Florida hospice.

The patient then was a 65-year-old drilling contractor, badly injured in a freak accident at his home. Among the family members keeping vigil at Brooke Army Medical Center was a grieving junior congressman — Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas).

More than 16 years ago, far from the political passions that have defined the Schiavo controversy, the DeLay family endured its own wrenching end-of-life crisis. The man in a coma, kept alive by intravenous lines and oxygen equipment, was DeLay's father, Charles Ray DeLay.

Then, freshly reelected to a third term in the House, the 41-year-old DeLay waited, all but helpless, for the verdict of doctors.

Today, as House Majority Leader, DeLay has teamed with his Senate counterpart, Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), to champion political intervention in the Schiavo case. They pushed emergency legislation through Congress to shift the legal case from Florida state courts to the federal judiciary.

And DeLay is among the strongest advocates of keeping the woman, who doctors say has been in a persistent vegetative state for 15 years, connected to her feeding tube. DeLay has denounced Schiavo's husband, as well as judges, for committing what he calls "an act of barbarism" in removing the tube.

In 1988, however, there was no such fiery rhetoric as the congressman quietly joined the sad family consensus to let his father die.

READ THE REST.

Rather than billions to an unnecessary foreign war, why not simply buy a solar roof for everyone in the country? We'd be a thousand times better off and less reliant on Middle East Oil. This company is leading the way.

Nanosolar, Inc., is focused on making solar electricity ubiquitous through new solar-cell technology with profitable customer economics and unprecedented production volume scalability.

Unprecedented cost advantages result from its solar cells being two orders of magnitude thinner than those commonly found on the market today as well as the economics of simply being able to print them with high yield and materials utilization using the company’s proprietary nanostructured semiconductor paint. Unprecedented production volume scalability results from the high throughput possible with inexpensive non-vacuum roll-to-roll printing processes.

NANOSOLAR.COM

Posted: 24 March 2005

Tell it like it is, Maureen.

DeLay, Deny and Demagogue
By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: March 24, 2005

Oh my God, we really are in a theocracy. Are the Republicans so obsessed with maintaining control over all branches of government, and are the Democrats so emasculated about not having any power, that they are willing to turn the nation into a wholly owned subsidiary of the church?

The more dogma-driven activists, self-perpetuating pols and ratings-crazed broadcast media prattle about "faith," the less we honor the credo that a person's relationship with God should remain a private matter. As the Bush White House desperately maneuvers in Iraq to prevent the new government from being run according to the dictates of religious fundamentalists, it desperately maneuvers here to pander to religious fundamentalists who want to dictate how the government should be run. Maybe President Bush should spend less time preaching about spreading democracy around the world and more time worrying about our deteriorating democracy.

Even some Republicans seemed appalled at this latest illustration of Nietzsche's observation that "morality is the best of all devices for leading mankind by the nose." As Christopher Shays, one of five House Republicans who voted against the bill to allow the Terri Schiavo case to be snatched from Florida state jurisdiction and moved to federal court, put it: "This Republican Party of Lincoln has become a party of theocracy. There are going to be repercussions from this vote."

A CBS News poll yesterday found that 82 percent of the public was opposed to Congress and the president intervening in this case; 74 percent thought it was all about politics. The president, who couldn't be dragged outdoors to talk about the more than a hundred thousand people who died in the horrific tsunami, was willing to be dragged out of bed to sign a bill about one woman his base had fixated on. But with the new polls, the White House seemed to shrink back a bit.

The scene on Capitol Hill this past week has been almost as absurdly macabre as the movie "Weekend at Bernie's," with Tom DeLay and Bill Frist propping up between them this poor woman in a vegetative state to indulge their own political agendas. Mr. DeLay, the poster child for ethical abuse, wanted to show that he is still a favorite of conservatives. Dr. Frist thinks he can ace out Jeb Bush to be 44, even though he has become a laughingstock by trying to rediagnose Ms. Schiavo's condition by video.

As one disgusted Times reader suggested in an e-mail: "Americans ought to send Bill Frist their requests: 'Dear Dr. Frist: Please watch the enclosed video and tell us if that mole on my mother's cheek is cancer. Does she need surgery?'"

Jeb, keeping up with the '08 competition, vainly tried to get Florida to declare Ms. Schiavo a ward of the state. Republicans easily abandon their cherished principles of individual privacy and states rights when their personal ambitions come into play. The first time they snatched a case out of a Florida state court to give to a federal court, it was Bush v. Gore. This time, it's Bush v. Constitution. While Senate Democrats like Hillary Clinton, who are trying to curry favor with red staters, meekly allowed the shameful legislation to be enacted, at least some Floridian House members decided to put up a fight, though they knew they couldn't win.

The president and his ideological partners don't believe in separation of powers. They just believe in their own power. First they tried to circumvent the Florida courts; now they're trying to pack the federal bench with conservatives and even blow up the filibuster rule. But they may yet learn a lesson on checks and balances, as the federal courts rebuffed them in the Schiavo case.

Mr. DeLay moved yesterday to file a friend of the court brief with the Supreme Court asking that Ms. Schiavo's feeding tube be restored while the federal court is deciding what to do. But as he exploits this one sad case, Mr. DeLay has voted to slash Medicaid by $15 billion, denying money to care for poor people in nursing homes, some on feeding tubes. Mr. DeLay made his personal stake clear at a conference last Friday organized by the Family Research Council, a conservative Christian group. He said that God had brought Terri Schiavo's struggle to the forefront "to help elevate the visibility of what's going on in America." He defined that as "attacks against the conservative movement, against me and against many others."

So it's not about her crisis at all. It's about his crisis.

From Grist on-line magazine.

Automakers make SUV engines bigger, less efficient

Under heated criticism for making SUVs that are unsafe and grossly fuel-inefficient, American automakers are responding the way any responsible industry would: making their SUVs even less safe and less fuel-efficient. General Motors, DaimlerChrysler, and Ford are all cranking up horsepower in their SUV engines, in some cases to the point that behemoths like the Jeep Grand Cherokee will go from 0 to 60 miles per hour in under five seconds, rivaling most sports cars. Though concerns about high gas prices, dependence on foreign oil, and global warming -- did we miss any? -- have heightened awareness of fuel economy, 84 percent of large-SUV owners still rank horsepower as an important vehicle attribute, compared to 45 percent who say the same about pinko-commie fixations like fuel economy. Of course, with their high centers of gravity and propensity to roll over in crashes, SUVs "were never designed to be driven as sports cars," says David Champion of Consumer Reports. So watch out!

straight to the source: The Wall Street Journal, Michelle Higgins, 24 Mar 2005 (access ain't free)

Biofuel catching on in the home-heating arena

Using biofuel -- a mix of vegetable oil and diesel -- to power vehicles is already popular in certain highly vocal circles, but using biofuel to heat homes is just starting to catch on. A recent surge has taken place largely in the U.S. Northeast, where there remains a large concentration of houses that use heating oil. Proponents tout the fact that biofuel produces far less soot and thus requires less furnace cleaning, which we're told is a nasty business. They are also motivated by a desire to support energy independence and the domestic economy. "About 20 out of every 100 gallons of bioheat goes to American farmers and producers instead of unstable foreign countries," says biofuel user Charles Kleekamp. Though it currently costs roughly 10 to 20 cents more per gallon than regular heating fuel, mainly because of the paucity of manufacturing facilities (Northeast biofuel is transported all the way from Florida), enthusiasts hope that rising demand will drive down prices. Already a biodiesel production facility is in the works for Providence, R.I., for next year.

straight to the source: The Boston Globe, Jaci Conry, 24 Mar 2005

From The Center for American Progress

EDUCATION – FLORIDA BILL TARGETS "DICTATOR PROFESSORS": Conservative Florida legislators are pushing a bill that aims to stamp out "leftist totalitarianism" by "dictator professors" in the classrooms of Florida's universities. The so-called "Academic Freedom Bill of Rights" legislation is yet another state spin-off of right-wing activist David Horowitz's campus crusade to prohibit public and private college professors from introducing "controversial matter" into the classroom and shift oversight of college course content to state governments and courts. "According to a legislative staff analysis of the bill, the law would give students who think their beliefs are not being respected legal standing to sue professors and universities," the University of Florida's student newspaper reports. Students would also have the right to sue if they believe their professor is "singling them out for 'public ridicule' – for instance, when professors use the Socratic method to force students to explain their theories in class." The bill has two more committees to pass before it can be considered by the full House.

WOMEN'S RIGHTS – DEPARTMENT OF ED SKIRTS TITLE IX: In its own version of March Madness, the Department of Education has "quietly issued a new clarification of the regulations interpreting Title IX." Posting the change on a Friday afternoon, the Education Department's move "could make it easier for colleges" to claim compliance with Title IX, the statute that prohibits institutions receiving federal financing from discriminating based upon sex differences. Immediately disparaged by women's advocacy groups, the new change allows colleges to use online surveys to assess whether female students are having their sports interests met but can interpret high nonresponse rates to the surveys as lack of interest. Thus, out of the various things that nonresponse might actually mean, the college can conclude that nonresponse means that interests are being "fully and effectively" accommodated. The Department of Education defends the decision not to announce the clarification by stating it has not changed its policy; however, the co-president of the National Women's Law Center responded, "The new guidance changes the whole landscape."

PROPAGANDA – UNIONS AIM TO TERMINATE ARNOLD'S FAUX NEWS: In California, where an actor serves as governor, it seems only fitting that union leaders are now becoming TV directors (or at least trying to yell "cut!" on the set). The San Francisco Chronicle reports that three of the state's most prominent labor unions have filed suit seeking to stop the Schwarzenegger administration from distributing news-like propaganda segments it produced to promote its agenda. One of the two ads was actually targeted at California workers, touting a government-backed, corporation-friendly proposal that would kill mandatory lunch hours, complete with a positive promo text for local anchors claiming the bill "would clear up uncertainty in the business community and create a better working environment throughout the state." Never mentioned was the fact that organized labor opposes the rule change, nor that the proposal is backed by the California Restaurant Association, "which donated $21,000 to one of Schwarzenegger's campaign funds last year and provided food for his 2003 inauguration."

SOCIAL SECURITY – TEACHERS REVOLT: The trustees of the Vermont State Teachers' Retirement System, which helps fund retirement benefits for thousands of former Vermont educators, took a vote that has set them up to be "the first public pension board in the country to take formal action against President Bush's Social Security reforms." Passing 4-2, the resolution declares that Vermont's three public pension boards will "carefully consider the activities and involvement of investment firms in efforts to promote privatization during the selection and retention process of such firms." This move is intended to make it difficult for firms to both be proponents of privatization efforts and also managers of the over $1 billion of assets in the teachers' fund. Jeb Spaulding, the state treasurer of Vermont, applauded the statement and is now encouraging other public retirement boards in the state to follow suit.

IMMIGRATION – BUSH SHIFTS THE BLAME: Immigration reform and overhauling Social Security are two proposals that President Bush addressed during his State of the Union address. Though the president has pledged his support to both issues, immigration received a few sentences during the annual speech, whereas shilling for his Social Security plan received paragraphs upon paragraphs and has been followed up by a 60 stops in 60 days tour. Now, President Bush has shifted the blame for inaction on immigration reform onto the shoulders of Congress. During his meeting with the president of Mexico and prime minister of Canada, President Bush promised to continue working on the issue and then told the leaders, "You don't have my pledge that Congress will act, because I'm not a member of the legislative branch." When it comes to forcing his Social Security plan, the administration openly threatens Congress, but with issues like immigration, apparently there is respect for checks and balances.

Posted: 23 March 2005

I've read up a bit more on the Shiavo case and I think I must eat some of my words. Now that I see more info about her actual medical condition, the lengthy history of trials, who said what and who did what, I'm now more leery of the parents and their dubious "pro-life" lawyer who had the gall to file a brief based on an opinion by the pope. Hello? The pope does not tell us how to conduct our law. Sheesh.

I hadn't realized before how severe the brain damage is after 15 years. I think the parents are holding on to false hope and that's a shame. It also looks like there's some calculated smearing of the husband going on. The whole thing is a miserable mess. If nothing else, it's gotten a large segment of the country thinking about living wills and how they'd want to be treated.

Meanwhile, in Texas, Bush had no trouble signing a law that withdraws life support when the family can't pay for it. How compassionate.

From Grist on-line magazine.

Concerns about sea critters grow as ocean noise levels increase

As the world's shipping traffic more than sextupled between 1948 and 1998, scientists say the oceans' noise levels have increased by some 15 decibels -- and as the impact of decibels is calculated exponentially, that's nothing to sneeze at. Researchers worry about the possible threat to many marine organisms that depend on their sense of hearing to survive. Scientists have speculated for years about the relationship between marine mammal beachings -- such as the recent dolphin strandings on Florida's Key West -- and military sonar blasts. Some researchers believe the "acoustic smog" may also affect the animals' ability to feed, breed, communicate with each other, and navigate the waters. Joel Reynolds, Marine Mammal Program director at the Natural Resources Defense Council, argues for regulating ocean noise: "We have to treat it like any other form of pollution."

straight to the source: The Standard-Times, Associated Press, Jay Lindsay, 20 Mar 2005

straight to the source: Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Debera Carlton Harrell, 18 Mar 2005

World Water Day celebrated by U.N., few others

In case you haven't heard -- and you haven't -- today is World Water Day, an annual holiday aimed at drawing attention to alarming stats about global water needs, encouraging world leaders to take action, and otherwise passing by unnoticed. But today isn't just any old World Water Day; it's also the kick-off for the United Nations-backed International Decade for Water, during which the organization will focus on fulfilling its Millennium Goals, which include aiding the estimated 2.4 billion people worldwide who have no access to sanitary sewage systems and the 1.1 billion who lack safe drinking water -- numbers the U.N. hopes to cut in half by 2015. Although the goals were set out in 2000, little has been done thus far to achieve them. They were just waiting for the right holiday.

straight to the source: Terra Daily, Agence France-Presse, 22 Mar 2005

Automakers launch ad campaign claiming cars are squeaky clean

Fed up with negative publicity, automakers are making their vehicles virtually emission-free. Oh, wait, did we say "making"? We meant "calling." The "virtually emission-free" claim is at the heart of a new print ad campaign targeted at federal legislators by a coalition of automakers including Ford, Toyota, and General Motors. There's a grain of truth behind the campaign: Some car models generate roughly 99 percent fewer smog-forming emissions than their counterparts in the pre-regulation 1960s. But critics, including the Union of Concerned Scientists, point out several problems. For one, most automakers have acknowledged that smog remains a serious public-health problem that requires further efforts on their part. For another, the campaign disregards emissions not classified as pollutants by the U.S. EPA -- in other words, carbon dioxide. But again, automakers themselves have acknowledged that greenhouse gases like CO2 are causing climate change and need to be cut. The UCS has mounted a counter-campaign that it says has generated 20,000 complaints to the Federal Trade Commission about the coalition's claims.

straight to the source: The New York Times, Danny Hakim, 22 Mar 2005

do good: Join the UCS campaign to stop automakers' "emission-free" deception

Sixteen years after Exxon Valdez, tankers still not safe

This week, to mark the 16th anniversary of the Exxon Valdez disaster that spilled 11 million gallons of oil in Alaska's Prince William Sound, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer is running a special series on the environmentally precarious state of modern oil-tanker transport. Some key findings of its investigation: Post-Valdez initiatives intended to reduce crew hours, require more tug escorts for tankers, and crack down on alcohol use are all regularly dodged. Many West Coast officials have been lobbying to loosen tug-escort rules meant to help shepherd tankers safely to port. Also, even 16 years later, Exxon still hasn't double-hulled any of its Alaskan tankers. And even modern double-hulled tankers, such as those now used by ConocoPhillips to transport nearly 38 million gallons of oil at a time, are still vulnerable to spills thanks to human fallibility. More sobering, perhaps, is the fact that experts estimate it only takes some 1 million gallons of spilled oil to cripple wildlife and commerce in sensitive waterways for months or years. Sigh.

straight to the source: Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Eric Nalder, 22 Mar 2005

see also, in Grist: Riki-Tikki-Savvy -- Riki Ott, author of a book on the Exxon Valdez spill, answers Grist's questions -- in InterActivist

New study finds toxic chemicals in household dust

Samples of household dust from 70 residences in seven U.S. states were found to contain a toxic cocktail of industrial chemicals -- all of which have been shown to harm animals, all of which are legal and commonly used. The study, conducted by consumer-advocate group Clean Production Action, tested the dust for 44 chemicals and found 35 of them. The most common, and most controversial, are phthalates: plasticizers used to soften the vinyl in carpet, furniture fabric, shower curtains, and plenty else. Phthalates mess with the reproductive systems of animals, but have not been tested extensively for human health effects -- mainly because lax U.S. regulations don't require such testing. Industry groups hastened to say that just because these chemicals are everywhere doesn't mean they're harming the, uh, guinea pigs using them. But, asks CPA director Beverley Thorpe, "why should we take chances on chemicals we know are inherently hazardous when safe chemicals exist, and progressive companies are putting in place safe chemical policies?"

straight to the source: San Francisco Chronicle, Jane Kay, 23 Mar 2005

From The Center for American Progress

PATRIOT ACT – AN 'UNUSUAL COALITION' IN DEFENSE OF CIVIL LIBERTIES: Yesterday, Patriots to Restore Checks and Balances, "an unusual coalition of conservative groups and the American Civil Liberties Union," announced "a public campaign to scale back" the overreaching surveillance powers now permitted under the Patriot Act. The group is headed by Bob Barr, a former Congressman who originally voted for the legislation but now insists that "keeping the law intact 'will do great and irreparable harm' to the Constitution." The alliance wants Congress to let lapse sixteen of the surveillance powers provisions that are set to expire at the end of this year as well as amend other "extreme" provisions. Though the group has entreated President Bush to "reconsider his support for full renewal of the law," neither he nor anyone else in his administration has backed away from professing their blind support of the Patriot Act.

HEALTH CARE
A Plan for a Healthy America

Since 2000, the number of uninsured Americans has risen by five million, to 45 million, or nearly 16 percent of all Americans. Millions more are struggling to pay soaring Medicare premiums, which routinely dwarf annual wage increases. The result is that many Americans are left to "overcrowded emergency rooms, under-funded clinics, or no health care at all." Today, the Center for American Progress presents a comprehensive plan to improve the health of all Americans. The Plan for a Healthy America provides an innovative blueprint for affordable, quality health coverage, building on the strengths of our current system while responding to its serious shortcomings.

COVERING EVERYONE: The United States spends $41 billion per year on "uncompensated" care for people with no insurance, while the economy loses between $65 billion and $130 billion in productivity. More than 18,000 25- to 64-year-olds die every year because they don't have health insurance. Under American Progress's plan, health coverage would be available and affordable for all Americans, through either employee-sponsored insurance, Medicaid, or a new group insurance pool modeled on the system used by federal employees and members of Congress. The pool, based on the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP), would assist all those who lack access to job-based insurance – a problem for about 80 percent of all uninsured people. American Progress's plan would also ensure that cost is not a barrier to coverage by providing income-related financial assistance. In return for guaranteed access to affordable coverage, all Americans would be expected to enroll in one of the available options or pay an income-related charge to support the care they will inevitably use.

ADDING VALUE: American Progress's plan seeks to improve the value of health coverage in three ways. First, the plan puts wellness ahead of illness by calling for a national focus on disease prevention and health promotion. Coverage for preventive services would be taken out of the insurance system and coordinated through a new, nationwide but community-based benefit focused on training people to be better managers of their own health. Second, the plan would increase funding for research on "comparative effectiveness," so individuals and their providers would have access to the information required to make good treatment decisions. Finally, the plan would seek to improve health care productivity through information technology. Right now, only a small fraction of America's medical transactions are conducted electronically. An investment in cutting edge technology would eventually lead to better quality and more efficient health care.

FINANCING THE INVESTMENT: Because of the fiscal deterioration that has occurred under President Bush's watch – transforming a record surplus into a record deficit – the Plan for a Healthy America calls on Americans to make an investment in improving their health care. The plan seeks to do this through a small value-added tax (VAT), the revenues from which would go to a trust fund used exclusively to finance the plan. A VAT is a tax on the value of a good or service during various stages of production. Targeted exemptions would ensure the tax is broad-based and fair, and would reduce its impact on low-income individuals.

OUR OBLIGATION TO ACT: The United States remains one of the only developed nations that has not met our moral obligation to provide health insurance to our citizens. At the Center, we disagree with those – like Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) – who say it is "impossible" to provide quality health insurance for all Americans. In fact, public opinion polling shows Americans believe in the right to quality health care and they are willing to make sacrifices to achieve it. Almost two-thirds (63 percent) of U.S. adults cite lowering the costs of health care and health insurance as a top priority for the president and Congress. When asked to name the single most important issue for Congress to address in 2005, five times as many (10 percent) say health care as say Social Security (2 percent).

VALUES
DeLay's Divorce from Morality

The Washington Post confronted Tom DeLay with this passage from Monday's Progress Report: "At every opportunity, [House Majority Leader] Tom DeLay has sanctimoniously proclaimed his concern for the well-being of Terri Schiavo, saying he is only trying to ensure she has the chance 'we all deserve.' Just last week, DeLay marshaled a budget resolution through the House of Representatives that would cut funding for Medicaid by at least $15 billion, threatening the quality of care for people like Terri Schiavo." In today's edition, DeLay's spokesman, Dan Allen, responded. Allen said, "The fact that they're tying a life issue to the budget process shows just how disconnected [they] are to reality." Allen's statement succinctly reveals exactly what is wrong with right-wing leaders like Tom DeLay. DeLay and his allies have divorced their conceptions of morality from their core responsibilities as legislators, like the budget. As a result, they are advancing amoral policies which have devastating effects on children, the sick and the indigent. (Share your thoughts on DeLay's response at ThinkProgress.org.)

THE BUDGET AS A MORAL DOCUMENT: Tom DeLay should read his mail. On Jan. 25, a group of 60 religious leaders from diverse faiths sent a letter to all 535 members of Congress. The letter said, "Despite its complexity, the budget is essentially a moral document – the specific expression of the values of the nation," and urged Congress to review the budget with six essential questions in mind, including: "Does the budget provide adequately for all of God's children, including the poor and sick, the old and very young?" and "Does the budget provide those in need with the assistance necessary to build self-reliant, purposeful lives?" The religious leaders who signed the document did so because they understand the impact that the federal budget has on the lives of Americans. Tom DeLay, apparently, does not.

THE BUDGET IS A LIFE ISSUE: For many Americans, the federal budget is an issue of life and death. Tom DeLay is pushing Medicaid cuts of at least $15 billion over five years. (That would mean a loss of $673 million in Florida alone.) Medicaid currently "pays for health and long-term care services for over 50 million low-income and disabled individuals." States are already "struggling to fund their share of Medicaid's costs, and a number are significantly reducing coverage or benefits." DeLay's proposal would "reduce the federal commitment to Medicaid and shift costs to states which would increase the pressures that states are facing." If DeLay's version of the budget passes, the effect "would likely be to increase the number of low-income people in the United States who are uninsured or underinsured." According to the Institute of Medicine, lack of health insurance already "causes roughly 18,000 unnecessary deaths every year in the United States."

AMORAL TAX POLICY: DeLay and his right-wing allies claim cuts in Medicaid and other vital services are necessary to achieve budget discipline. They see no shortage of cash, however, to shower on the wealthiest Americans. The House budget proposal "calls for $106 billion in tax cuts over the next five years." An analysis by the Urban Institute-Brookings Tax Policy Center reveals that 46 percent of the benefits "from the dividend and capital gains tax cuts accrue to the nation's small handful of people with incomes exceeding $1 million a year, a group that constitutes only 0.2 percent of U.S. households." Pursuing these policies while cutting health benefits for the most vulnerable shows how disconnected DeLay and his allies are from the struggles of many Americans.

Posted: 21 March 2005

I have conflicting feelings about the Terri Shiavo case, but I am sick to death of the Republican Congress and the Bushies showboating to spin political advantage. The breakdown from my minimally informed viewpoint is that the courts should not be taking the husband's word that this is what his wife wanted. I mean, c'mon, how many young couples sat around 15 years ago discussing whether they'd want to be kept alive on a feeding tube? I'm not sure I believe the guy. That aside, the only way someone should be condemned to death in that manner is when that person PUT IT IN WRITING, rock-solid and unassailable. The fault lies with Florida and the idiotic judge who based his ruling on the husband's word with no proof to back it up.

Other people have made miraculous recoveries from seemingly hopeless traumas. As long as her parents are willing to work with the woman, no one should get in their way. That's my gut level feeling. But as an American citizen, I do NOT want my government mandating on a single case. That is not the role of the Federal government. It's not like I believe for a second that Bush genuinely gives a damn, not after his performance as governor of Texas with its sky-high death sentence rate. He didn't show a lot of compassion there. It's political whoring of the worst sort.

From Grist on-line magazine.

New York fashion show highlights eco-friendly garb

Green may soon be the new black, some fashionistas say. Case in point: the FutureFashion runway show last month during New York's Fashion Week. Everything worn in the show -- including clothes by high-profile designers Oscar de la Renta and Proenza Schouler -- was made with eco-friendly fibers such as bamboo, corn, and organic cotton. Some clothing execs are hoping eco-apparel will go the way of organic food and beauty products, which have become a $15 billion mainstream industry. Production of clothing fibers can be highly damaging to the environment, with cotton being one of the worst. According to the nonprofit Sustainable Cotton Project, the making of a simple T-shirt may involve the use of a third of a pound of agricultural chemicals as well as other nasties like ammonia and formaldehyde. That's inspiring many vendors -- including Whole Foods, Nike, and even Sam's Club -- to start selling organic cotton. Says eco-designer Marci Zaroff, "We're taking the market from hippie to hip."

straight to the source: The New York Times, Amy Cortese, 20 Mar 2005

From The Center for American Progress

VALUES – VIRGINS WITH STDS: President Bush has pushed hard for an ideological policy when it comes to teen sex: teaching abstinence and nothing else. It's not working. A new study published in the Journal of Adolescent Health finds that 88 percent of sexually active people who took an "abstinence pledge" as young adults had intercourse before marriage. And talk about unintended consequences: sexually active pledgers were less likely to use condoms and more likely to experiment with riskier activities such as oral and anal sex, the study found, and were just as likely to contract a venereal disease as people who didn't make the promise. In related news, congressional Republicans last week defeated a pregnancy prevention measure offered by Sens. Harry Reid (D-NV) and Hillary Clinton (D-NY) which would have "included more funding for family planning, teen pregnancy programs and education about emergency contraception." Why would supposedly "pro-life" conservatives in Congress reject a bill specifically aimed at preventing unwanted pregnancies? "New Hampshire Republican Judd Gregg, chairman of the Budget Committee, argued against the measure, saying it would block funding to abstinence-only sex education programs."

NORTH KOREA – WHEN THE MEANS DON'T ACHIEVE THE ENDS: In a meeting with Asian allies, "hastily arranged after China and South Korea indicated they were considering bolting from six-party talks on North Korea," the Bush administration levied a "significant new charge" meant to "increase pressure on North Korea." However, the accusation – "that Pyongyang had exported nuclear material to Libya" – was "not what U.S. intelligence reported." In fact, the materials had been given to Pakistan, which then turned around and sold them to Libya, seemingly without North Korea's knowledge. This purposeful misleading of Asian allies to force North Korea further into isolation has "instead left allies increasingly doubtful," and "North Korea responded to public reports ... about the briefings by withdrawing" from the six-party talks. Additionally, covering up "Pakistan's role as both the buyer and the seller" in the transaction and not holding President Musharraf accountable for the Pakistani nuclear black market is just another example of how far this administration will go to protect its "ally" in the war on terror. In fact, the former Bush administration special envoy for the North Korea talks stated, "The administration is giving Pakistan a free ride when they don't deserve it and hurting U.S. interests at the same time."

ADMINISTRATION – THE FEDERAL WITCH HUNT: If the state of a democracy can be judged by its respect for dissenters to those in power, then this administration may be running aground of the foundations of our nation. Along with the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, "roughly a dozen nonprofit organizations have publicly contended that government agencies and Congressional offices" have used oversight and investigatory powers "to discourage them from activities and advocacy that in any way challenge government policies," and claim that other nonprofits are complaining but not as vocally. For example, after questioning "the efficacy of abstinence-only sex education," Advocates for Youth, a nonprofit that educates young people about reproductive health, faced what its president could only describe as "bare-knuckled intimidation" from dozens of conservatives in Congress. The government watchdog group OMB Watch has been investigating the issue since the investigations "started happening in a serial way."

DELAY VOTED TO SLASH FUNDING THAT PAID FOR SCHIAVO'S CARE: At every opportunity, Tom DeLay has sanctimoniously proclaimed his concern for the well-being of Terri Schiavo, saying he is only trying to ensure she has the chance "we all deserve." Schiavo's medications are paid for by Medicaid. Just last week, DeLay marshaled a budget resolution through the House of Representatives that would cut funding for Medicaid by at least $15 billion, threatening the quality of care for people like Terri Schiavo. Because the Senate voted to restore the funding, DeLay is threatening to hold up the entire budget process if he doesn't get his way.

FRIST FIGHTING AGAINST FINANCIAL RECOVERY FOR PEOPLE LIKE SCHIAVO: Bill Frist has been positioning himself in the media as a champion for Schiavo's interests. Yet, much of Schiavo's medical care has been financed by $1,000,000 from two medical malpractice lawsuits Schiavo won after her heart attack 15 years ago. Frist has been leading the charge to limit recovery for people like Schiavo who are severely debilitated. If Frist is successful, people like Schiavo would not be able to recover any punitive damages no matter how severe their injuries.

IRAQ
An Eye on the Troops

This weekend marked the two-year anniversary of the Iraq war. Americans across the nation marked the occasion. Some protested. Some led candlelight vigils. Some, like Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, spent the day spinning the news trying to deflect attention from mistakes. The one overarching theme, however, is ongoing concern for U.S. soldiers. Today there are 152,000 troops deployed in Iraq. Since the invasion, 1,511 U.S. troops have been killed. More than 11,000 have been wounded. (For a look at the face of U.S. casualties in Iraq, read this Center for American Progress chart which appeared this weekend in the New York Times.) The Bush White House, with no clear exit strategy from Iraq in sight, has stretched the U.S. military to the near-breaking point. Recruitment is down, disillusionment is up, and the administration has had to scramble to find ways to keep the military at capacity.

RECRUITMENT IS DOWN: Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told Congress last month that five of the six military reserve branches – which provide 40 percent of the troops in Iraq – missed their recruiting goals for the first four months of the current fiscal year. Over the past 18 months, for example, "the National Guard has been missing its recruitment goals by about 30 percent." Part of this has been caused by neglect and mistreatment of these troops. Inferior equipment and training mean part-time soldiers in the Army National Guard are significantly more likely to be killed in Iraq than full-time active-duty soldiers serving there. They're also likely to pull double shifts – since 9/11, more than 412,000 Guard and Reserve troops have been activated for at least one tour of duty. Of those, more than 63,000 have been mobilized twice. Also, nearly a thousand Army Reserve and National Guard troops wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan had to go "months without pay or medical benefits they were entitled to receive," due to bureaucratic error.

THE GRAYING OF THE RESERVES: According to Stars and Stripes, the military paper, the Army National Guard and Reserves last week decided to bump up the maximum age for new enlistments from 34 years to 39 years. The move comes "as reserve recruiters are struggling to convince potential recruits to join even as unit leaders are failing to convince enough troops to stay in uniform beyond initial contracts." Center for American Progress's Larry Korb states, "Of course, the Guard and Reserve are going to have trouble recruiting. They've always depended on not just raw recruits out of high school, but on veteran soldiers who leave active duty and then join the Guard and Reserve. Those guys are more reluctant to do that now."

TARGETING KIDS: Slipped into the middle of President Bush's No Child Left Behind legislation, which is supposed to help kids get a better education, is a provision to help the Pentagon recruit high school kids into the military. Section 9528 of the bill allows U.S. military recruiters access to private student contact information unless students, parents or guardians opt-out in writing. (If schools fail to provide information, they lose out on federal funds.) "Not only has No Child Left Behind [funding] been shortchanged by the war in Iraq, now we learn the military is using it for an immoral recruitment scheme," said Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA). "No Child Left Behind is supposed to be about student achievement, not military recruiting."

RUMSFELD'S SWEET SLUMBER: Earlier this year, the Army Reserve's top general, Lt. Gen. James "Ron" Helmly, warned that "current demands" on those troops has caused the Army Reserve to begin "rapidly degenerating into a 'broken' force." Two weeks ago, the Army vice chief of staff, Gen. Richard Cody, told a Senate hearing: "what keeps me awake at night is what will this all-volunteer force look like in 2007?" Gen. Myers refused to acknowledge the problem, telling Tim Russert, "No. The all-volunteer force is working marvelously." Rumsfeld on the problems faced by the Guard: "It doesn't keep me up at night."

ARE WE READY AND ABLE?: A military that is stretched so thin could limit U.S. capability to respond to threats. As Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI), also a veteran, said, "The U.S. military will respond if there are vital threats, but will it respond with as many forces as it needs, with equipment that is in excellent condition? The answer is no." Gen. Myers was unable to deflect this criticism yesterday. He acknowledged, "We've been using up equipment at a rapid rate." And, asked about the ability of the U.S. military to take on upcoming possible threats, such as finding and destroying nuclear capabilities of Iran and North Korea, Myers admitted, "I didn't say that. What I said is we can deal with a security threat they might pose, and I'll just leave it there."

Posted: 20 March 2005

If you think you should have the freedom to take vitamins and supplements, you had better pay attention to this. You can bet the powerful pharmaceutical lobby in the US will be watching this closely.

The Documentation About "Codex Alimentarius"
What are the aims of the Codex Alimentarius Commission?
Constructed by the pharmaceutical industry, the Codex Alimentarius Commission is a self-proclaimed expert organization that has allied with the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Food Organization (FAO). From the beginning, this was done with the intention of passing regulations and laws to protect the global pharmaceutical market.

Of the 30 committees using the title "Codex Alimentarius," those involved with food supplements and vitamins are of particular interest to the pharmaceutical industry. The central committee is the "Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses." A puppet of the pharmaceutical industry, this committee has only been concerned with one topic since the middle of the 1990's: how to prevent vitamins and other food supplements from causing the collapse of the markets for beta-blockers, calcium antagonists, cholesterol lowering products and other widely superfluous pharmaceutical preparations.

By far, Germany is the biggest exporter of these dubious pharmaceutical products and nowhere else in the world exists such a bond between the pharmaceutical industry and politics. Therefore it is no surprise that the Government of the German Federal Republic is in charge of this committee, benefiting the pharmaceutical cartel.

The aims of Codex Alimentarius are clearly defined: Statements on the curative effects of vitamins and other natural remedies will be banned and made a punishable offense. In the future, the distinction between a foodstuff and a medicine will be made by the pharmaceutical industry itself and not by governments.

Using this new legislative edict, the pharmaceutical industry will extend its own markets as it sees fit. At present, the pharmaceutical industry has succeeded in classifying 500 milligrams of vitamin C in pill form as a medication requiring a prescription in Germany. If the pharmaceutical industry had its way, 100 mg or even 50 mg of vitamin C would be classified as medication.

The pharmaceutical industry knows that most people have no understanding of these restrictions and has disguised them with legal jargon.

The strategic aims of "Codex Alimentarius"

1. The distribution of health information concerning vitamins, amino acids, minerals and other natural products for the prevention and treatment of diseases will be banned globally.
2. The sale of vitamins and other natural products which exceed the guidelines of this Codex commission (which are arbitrary and far too low) will be prohibited globally.
3. Countries that fail to apply these laws will be punished by international economic sanctions.

READ THE REST.

Now this is cool science!

Brain Power For the first time, a paralyzed man with an experimental brain implant bypassed his damaged spine to manipulate an artificial limb and a computer program using only his imagination. This ScienCentral News video has more.

Movin' on His Mind

Americans celebrate their freedom every year on the same day that Matthew Nagle lost almost all of his. As Fourth of July fireworks flashed over Wessagussett Beach in Weymouth, Massachusetts nearly four years ago, Nagle found himself in a sea of flying fists and within minutes, Nicholas Cirignano, a man with a lengthy criminal past, plunged a hunting knife into Nagle's neck, severing his spine. Doctors had two more pieces of bad news for Nagle: He'd never walk again and his daily activity would be severely limited.

But Brown University neuroscientist John Donoghue has another life in mind for people like Nagle, whose paralysis renders him highly dependent on others. Since the 1990’s, Donoghue's been working on a brain implant that can route brain signals to machines that process the signals and issue commands. Now, just by thinking about the action of opening and closing his own paralyzed hand, Nagle is able to do the same to an artificial hand.

READ THE REST.

From The Center for American Progress

HEALTH CARE – SENATE STANDS UP FOR SENIORS: President Bush's plan to slash healthcare funding for the elderly has hit a major snag. Yesterday, the Senate "voted 52 to 48 to strip the budget of Medicaid cuts and instead create a one-year commission to recommend changes in the program." The vote in the Senate was seen as a bipartisan "rebuke to both the White House and the Republican leadership." Rep. Jim Nussle (R-IA) characterized the vote as a setback for Bush's entire domestic agenda, "suggesting that 'the momentum' of the entire package, including spending control, Social Security and tax code changes, was now at stake."

IRAQ – ANOTHER PARTNER BITES THE DUST: The U.S.-led coalition-of-the-dwindling in Iraq is set to lose another member. Bulgaria announced today that it "intends to cut the number of its troops in Iraq in July and to completely pull them out by the end of the year." The continual withdrawal of coalition partners will increase stress on U.S. troops and costs for taxpayers.

RIGHT WING – SOUTH DAKOTA ATTACKS WOMEN'S RIGHTS: Extremist right-wing forces are using South Dakota as a testing ground for their efforts to intimidate women considering an abortion. Gov. Mike Rounds signed into law yesterday a measure that will require "doctors, before performing abortions, to have their patients sign a statement acknowledging that they are terminating the life of 'a whole, separate, unique, living human being.'" The statement also "tells a woman that she has 'an existing relationship with that unborn human being' and the relationship is protected under the US Constitution." If the doctors were to perform an abortion without having a woman sign the waiver they could face "30 days in jail."

AFGHANISTAN – ANOTHER DELAY FOR ELECTIONS: The march of freedom slowed down a step yesterday as "Afghanistan postponed its parliamentary elections once again from May to September." The delay "was the third postponement of the elections, originally scheduled for last June." Although it receives scant attention in the press, the insurgency in Afghanistan rages on, claiming "more than 1,000 lives in 18 months." The announcement of the postponed election came the same day as a visit by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who provided "little if any acknowledgment of the many problems troubling this nation."

MEDIA
FCC's Reruns

Earlier this week President Bush announced the elevation of Federal Communications Commission member Kevin Martin to the position of agency chairman, an in-house promotion that does not require confirmation by the Senate. Described as "a boyish-looking 38-year-old with sandy blond hair and Harry Potter-style glasses," Martin is a Bush loyalist who critics claim has "a similar set of values, which are not always in tune with consumer interests," as his predecessor Michael Powell. Though a media analyst said the appointment of Martin was "less a shift in policy than in leadership style," the future of our airwaves and press will be shaped by some big decisions that Martin will soon have to make. As freedom of speech and press are building blocks upon which democracy is founded, we can only hope that Martin chooses to serve the interests of the public rather than the pockets of the corporations.

ONE STATION FOR THE NATION?: Though the "FCC's main duty is to manage the public airwaves," Powell's ideology came under fire for his tendency to place commercial interests "first, second and third among priorities." This observation was highlighted by his attempts to pass through "the most significant relaxation of media ownership rules in three decades." The drastic rewrite of the media consolidation rules included allowing "a single TV network to acquire local stations that reach up to 45% of the national audience" and a partial lifting of cross ownership restrictions on broadcast and print organizations in the same market. Right now, five companies from the "Big Ten" already control an "approximately 75 percent share of broadcast and cable prime-time viewing."

MARTIN MIGHT MAKE IT HAPPEN: After an overwhelming public pushback, a federal appeals court ordered the FCC to reconsider the rules which employed "several irrational assumptions and inconsistencies." Unfortunately, the court-ordered and public-demanded rewrite will now be headed by new FCC Chairman Kevin Martin, a "free-market conservative" who "doesn't oppose consolidation" and has made "arguments for eliminating" the cross-ownership rules.

PLAYING CULTURE COP: With the time he freed up by letting media consolidation run wild, Powell utilized an arbitrary and overly "vague standard of indecency" to start a witch hunt of broadcasters and entertainers – in four years, total FCC fines levied soared from $48,000 in one year to over $7.7 million last year. Yet, in commenting on the Powell-Martin transition, the Parents Television Council stated, "the FCC has been delinquent in its stewardship of the public airwaves" and applauded the new chairman as "a stalwart leader on the issue of indecency." Martin is supported by this group – which "has been second to none in increasing the number of annual indecency complaints from 111 in 2000 to a million-plus last year" – because of his "aggressive approach in the so-called indecency cases," often dissenting when the rest of the FCC did not punish or did not punish enough.

SETTING PRIORITIES, RESTORING MEDIA DEMOCRACY: When the House was debating legislation "vastly increasing the fines" the FCC may impose for violation of indecency laws, Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) bemoaned, "If this legislation is enacted, the real victim will be free expression and Americans' First Amendment rights," since "broadcasters, particularly small broadcasters, will have no choice but to engage in a very dangerous cycle of self-censorship." (Look what happened to Buster.) With media consolidation and the threat of egregious fines, the government is effectively allowing a "small handful of individuals to decide what the whole nation is permitted to see, hear or think." And for all their focus on what is appropriate viewing for the people, Powell and the FCC have neglected Sinclair Broadcasting's "Sovietization" of the airwaves, the administration's obsession with payola and taxpayer funded propaganda scandals. If he is truly committed to working in the public's interests, Martin needs to address those issues, as well as the ever growing digital divide, to really start fixing our media.

We still face the possibility that our democracy has been hijacked.

Teresa Heinz Kerry - Hacking the "Mother Machine"?
by Thom Hartmann

"Two brothers own 80 percent of the [voting] machines used in the United States," Teresa Heinz Kerry told a group of Seattle guests at a March 7, 2005 lunch for Representative Adam Smith, according to reporter Joel Connelly in an article in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. Connelly noted Heinz Kerry added that it is "very easy to hack into the mother machines."

The two brothers Mrs. Kerry is referencing are, according to voting machine expert (and founder of www.BanVotingMachines.org) Lynn Landes, in an article for the Online Journal, Bob Urosevich, president of Diebold Election Systems, and Todd Urosevich, who was vice president for customer support of Chuck Hagel's old company, now known as ES&S.

Presumably the "mother machines" Teresa was talking about are the "central tabulator" computers, like the Windows-based Diebold central tabulator PC that Howard Dean hacked into and untraceably changed an election on - in 90 seconds - live on the "Topic A With Tina Brown" CNBC TV show late last year.

As Dean noted while hacking the Diebold machine on national television, "In 1998, only 7% of all U.S. counties used electronic voting machines." But, Dean noted of the 2004 race, "in the next presidential election, roughly 1 in 3 of us will use one."

READ THE REST.

Posted: 17 March 2005

We are so screwed.

Outscourcing Innovation...And Everything Else
America's Has-Been Economy

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

A country cannot be a superpower without a high tech economy, and America's high tech economy is eroding as I write.

The erosion began when US corporations outsourced manufacturing. Today many US companies are little more than a brand name selling goods made in Asia.

Corporate outsourcers and their apologists presented the loss of manufacturing capability as a positive development. Manufacturing, they said, was the "old economy," whose loss to Asia ensured Americans lower consumer prices and greater shareholder returns. The American future was in the "new economy" of high tech knowledge jobs.

This assertion became an article of faith. Few considered how a country could maintain a technological lead when it did not manufacture.

So far in the 21st century there is scant sign of the American "new economy." The promised knowledge-based jobs have not appeared. To the contrary, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports a net loss of 221,000 jobs in six major engineering job classifications.

Meanwhile the Grand Old Party has passed a bankruptcy "reform" that is certain to turn unemployed Americans living on debt and beset with unpayable medical bills into the indentured servants of credit card companies. The steely-faced Bush administration is making certain that Americans will experience to the full their counry's fall.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review.

READ THE REST.

Did anyone really doubt the Iraq war was about oil?

Secret US plans for Iraq's oil
By Greg Palast
Reporting for Newsnight

The Bush administration made plans for war and for Iraq's oil before the 9/11 attacks, sparking a policy battle between neo-cons and Big Oil, BBC's Newsnight has revealed.

Two years ago today - when President George Bush announced US, British and Allied forces would begin to bomb Baghdad - protesters claimed the US had a secret plan for Iraq's oil once Saddam had been conquered.

In fact there were two conflicting plans, setting off a hidden policy war between neo-conservatives at the Pentagon, on one side, versus a combination of "Big Oil" executives and US State Department "pragmatists".

"Big Oil" appears to have won. The latest plan, obtained by Newsnight from the US State Department was, we learned, drafted with the help of American oil industry consultants.

New plans, obtained from the State Department by Newsnight and Harper's Magazine under the US Freedom of Information Act, called for creation of a state-owned oil company favoured by the US oil industry. It was completed in January 2004 under the guidance of Amy Jaffe of the James Baker Institute in Texas.

Formerly US Secretary of State, Baker is now an attorney representing Exxon-Mobil and the Saudi Arabian government.

READ THE REST.

From Grist on-line magazine.

Falsified Yucca documents lead to investigation of project's science

The use of fabricated sources in a study about the safety of the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear-waste dump -- revealed in a series of emails between scientists -- has Energy and Interior Department officials scrambling to investigate. The U.S. Geological Survey study was critical to the project's approval, as it concluded that radioactive waste inside the depository would be safe, prevented from leaking into groundwater, for thousands of years. The project is already some 14 years behind schedule, and with questions arising about the science supporting the project, opponents -- including Nevada's congressional delegation and its Republican governor, Kenny Guinn -- may be successful in keeping the dump from being built at all. "This proves once again that [the Department of Energy] must cheat and lie in order to make Yucca Mountain look safe," said Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.). "It is abundantly clear that there is no such thing as 'sound science' at Yucca Mountain."

straight to the source: The New York Times, Matthew L. Wald, 17 Mar 2005

straight to the source: Los Angeles Times, Ralph Vartabedian, 17 Mar 2005

A PLASTIC ONLY AN INDUSTRY GROUP COULD LOVE
Anti-PVC movement grows, even as PVC use rises

A growing coalition of scientists, public-health advocates, environmentalists, and even corporations is fighting to rid the world of polyvinyl chloride (PVC). Some 300 billion pounds of PVC are in use worldwide, and 7 billion pounds are discarded each year in the U.S. alone, says the Center for Health, Environment, and Justice. Recycling PVC is difficult and labor-intensive; most plastic recyclers consider it contamination. In landfills, it leaches lead, cadmium, and phthalates into groundwater. Incinerating it releases the poison dioxin into the air. It is "one of the most environmentally hazardous consumer materials ever produced," according to Joe Thornton, biology professor at the University of Oregon. The Vinyl Institute, a disinterested group of, uh, PVC makers, denies such claims: "you can recycle, landfill, and incinerate it safely and effectively," says spokesflack Allen Blakely. Despite the institute's reassurances, an increasing number of companies, including Victoria's Secret, Nike, Mattel, General Motors, and Microsoft, have pledged to phase PVC out of their operations.

straight to the source: The Christian Science Monitor, Mark Clayton, 17 Mar 2005

see also, in Grist: Bill Walsh, founder of the Healthy Building Network, campaigns against PVC -- in InterActivist

U.S. opposes international plan to curb illegal logging, memo reveals

The U.S. is working to undermine a British-led effort to curb illegal logging in threatened rainforests, according to a leaked U.S. State Department memo. Indonesian leaders recently declared that they don't have the capacity to control the criminal gangs that are plundering the nation's tropical forests, and they asked wealthy nations to cut the demand for cheap, illegally obtained timber. In response, British Prime Minister Tony Blair proposed an initiative whereby the governments of wealthy G8 countries would pledge to buy lumber only if it comes from properly managed forests. But the leaked memo reveals an unofficial U.S. strategy to work with Canada to prevent restrictions on lumber purchases and convince Russia and Japan to oppose the British initiative as well. Some enviro activists blame the U.S. timber industry and its opposition to timber-certification efforts. Said Faith Doherty of the U.K.'s Environmental Investigation Agency, "This is outrageous. U.S. business simply doesn't want any restrictions on its own practices."

straight to the source: The Guardian, Paul Brown and Roger Harrabin, 16 Mar 2005

straight to the source: BBC News, Roger Harrabin, 15 Mar 2005

Hybrid railcar goes into use in California

With U.S. imports on the rise, ports are under growing scrutiny from air-quality regulators. Part of that concern focuses on the rail system that chugs goods out of ports and away to various Wal-Marts around the country. Yesterday, as part of its attempts to address such concerns, Union Pacific Railroad put into use one of the first locomotives using diesel-electric hybrid technology. The $800,000 "switch engine" -- a railcar that hooks freight cars to locomotives -- is expected to emit 80 to 90 percent less smog-forming nitrous oxide and use 40 to 70 percent less diesel fuel than its purely diesel counterparts. Union Pacific will analyze the hybrid's performance and decide whether to order more (at least three other hybrid switch locomotives are being used in demonstration projects around the country). Officials of the South Coast Air Quality Management District, which contains the Los Angeles and Long Beach ports, hailed the move and urged rail companies to make faster progress in implementing hybrid technology.

straight to the source: Los Angeles Times, Wendy Thermos and Deborah Schoch, 16 Mar 2005

From The Center for American Progress

IRAQ – AMERICANS SAY WAR WASN'T WORTH IT: Two years after President Bush took the country to war to disarm Saddam Hussein of weapons of mass destruction, a majority of Americans say they "believe the Iraqis are better off today than they were before the conflict began – but they also say the war was not worth fighting in the first place, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll." Fifty-three percent of Americans said the war was not worth fighting, 57 percent said they disapprove of the president's handling of Iraq, and 70 percent said the number of U.S. casualties, including more than 1,500 deaths, is an unacceptable price. For the first time in the new poll, a majority (51 percent) of Americans "called the war in Iraq a mistake."

IRAQ – THE DWINDLING COALITION: The U.S.-led coalition of the not-so-willing in Iraq lost another member yesterday when "Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi of Italy, one of the United States' most ardent supporters on Iraq, said … he intended to begin withdrawing his country's troops in September." The loss of Italy is significant because its contingent "is the fourth-largest contributor of foreign military forces to Iraq." Holland, Ukraine and Poland are also in the process of withdrawing troops.

TAXES – COLORADO BUDGET DISASTER KNOWN AS TABOR BEING PROMOTED NATIONWIDE: Right-wing radicals are continuing their campaign to make states adopt an artificial limit on revenue and spending known as the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR), even though in Colorado, the one state where it has been adopted, the measure is crippling the economy. As Stateline reports, TABOR has now put Colorado "in the strange position of facing a $234 million budget shortfall over the next two years – at the same time it must refund $345 million to state taxpayers," forcing Gov. Bill Owens (R) to recommend softening some of the measure's strict revenue-choking rules. Nevertheless, "that snag hasn't stopped Owens from personally visiting Kansas and touting the merits of TABOR amendments to control government growth." The measure – promoted by nationwide tax opponents like the Heritage Foundation and Grover Norquist – is being introduced for consideration in 16 states, with the best chances for passage in Arizona, California, Kansas, Missouri, Ohio, Oregon and Wisconsin.

MEDICAID
When the Right Wing Attacks

Medicaid, the efficient "major public health insurance program for low-income Americans … children and many of the sickest and poorest in our nation," is one of the many social programs that has come under President Bush's budget ax. "At a time when the program's costs are rising rapidly," an increase "driven primarily by enrollment growth due to the economic downturn," the president proposed $60 billion in federal funding cuts over the next 10 years. Following in step, his right-wing colleagues in both the House and the Senate have proposed even deeper cuts in Medicaid, slashing billions more than the president proposed. Write your senators and tell them you support the Smith-Bingaman amendment, a bipartisan push to protect Medicaid from these devastating cuts.

WHITE HOUSE HACKS AT MEDICAID…: With the encouragement of his new Secretary of Health and Human Services Michael Leavitt, President Bush keyed in on Medicaid and attacked the program with "the single largest reduction in his proposed budget for fiscal 2006." President Bush is trying to gut the program of $20 billion over the next five years and a grand total of $60 billion over the next 10 years. Though the budget turns around and reinvests a small percentage of the money "saved," the program still faces net cuts of $45 billion.

…AND CONGRESS KICKS IT WHEN IT'S DOWN: Aiming to please, committee heads in both chambers of Congress are doing their best to slash billions more from Medicaid. The key difference is that Congress relies on budgetary estimates from the Congressional Budget Office, not the White House's Office of Management and Budget, and the two offices have two different scorings of the administration's cuts to Medicaid. The end result: Overachieving congressional officials are looking at CBO's Medicaid figures and still trying to cut almost double – and potentially even triple – the amount that the administration has proposed. Furthermore, the committee heads have tried to protect these shocking cuts by putting them under special "reconciliation" instructions, which means the legislation "is packaged together and considered under special rules that limit amendments and do not allow a filibuster."

'DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS': Trying to gather support for their cuts, President Bush and HHS Secretary Michael Leavitt met with the National Governors Association (NGA) for days of negotiations, since states, which pay for about 50 percent of Medicaid spending, are also feeling the pressure. (For more about how the Bush administration is prioritizing tax cuts for the wealthiest at the expense of health care for the poorest, see American Progress's state-by-state comparison of budget cuts for Medicaid versus tax cuts for investors.) Though the chairman of the NGA stressed that "getting it right is more important than getting it quick," Leavitt tried to push for a "quick deal" but would not provide the governors with "enough information to thrash out an agreement," as is the tendency with this administration. Governors across the nation are now "united in their opposition to the administration's cuts," which would tie their hands and leave no other option "than to kick people off the rolls." Without Medicaid, "the vast majority of its beneficiaries would join the ranks of the 45 million uninsured Americans."

BUSH PUTS THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE: Understanding Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour's objection that "budget was driving policy rather than policy driving the budget," a bipartisan coalition of senators is putting forth an amendment to take the "proposed Medicaid cuts from the table and create a commission to study Medicaid." Headed by Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) and Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), the amendment would replace the cuts with a commission "to conduct a comprehensive review to determine how to improve service delivery and quality in the most cost-effective way possible under Medicaid." Fighting against those who are fighting for children, the elderly, and the disabled, "HHS Secretary Mike Leavitt is 'making calls to line up opposition to Smith's proposal.'" Show our elected officials that you care about our families by expressing your support for the Smith-Bingaman Amendment.

ENVIRONMENT
No Refuge from Greed

"As one of his last acts in office" Republican President Dwight Eisenhower set aside the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, "the only place in the nation where the full spectrum of arctic and sub-arctic ecosystems is protected in an unbroken continuum." The 19 million-acre refuge is a land so pristine that it has been described as "a domain for any restless soul who yearns to discover the startling beauties of creation … where life exists without molestation by man." The name given to the area by the Gwich'in tribe, the indigenous people of the region, "translates to The Sacred Place Where Life Begins." But big oil has been greedily devouring the lands surrounding this virgin wilderness area, turning them into an industrial site riddled with scores of contaminated waste sites and daily pollution spills. And now, after using backdoor tactics disapproved of by the overwhelming majority of Americans, right wingers in the Senate and White House have set the stage for big oil to drill through the very "biological heart of this untamed wilderness," with the hope of drilling in other environmentally sensitive areas.

FUZZY NUMBERS…: The United States Treasury will likely never see the drilling revenues presupposed by President Bush's 2006 budget. The budgetary estimates drastically exaggerate the price per leased acre, in some cases expecting "between 66 and 120 times the historic average." Waning industry interest in the area is also a serious factor and one of President Bush's own advisors stated, "If the government gave [the oil companies] the leases for free, they wouldn't take them."

…GET EVEN FUZZIER: The administration also is relying on a 50-50 split of the revenues between Alaska and the federal government, but "current law calls for 90 percent to go to Alaska." And it is likely that Alaskans would be ready to go to court with the federal government to protect the 90-10 split. Remarkably, it is not just the revenue but the refuge's oil itself that may never reach American consumers; Alaska's congressional delegates are loudly clamoring to restart oil exportation to foreign countries.

'A DISTRACTION, NOT A SOLUTION': Drilling in the Arctic refuge "serves neither short-term demand … nor long-term national policy." After the decade or longer it will take to begin oil production on the land, the United States Geological Service estimates the amount technically recoverable and economically profitable to recover "represents less than a year's U.S. supply." At the height of production, "the refuge would produce a paltry 1 or 2 percent of Americans' daily consumption." Tire changes and updated fuel efficiency standards could individually save more oil than is likely to be found in the refuge.

COMING SOON TO A COASTLINE NEAR YOU: If neither big oil nor the majority of Americans wants drilling in the Arctic refuge, the environmental consequences will be permanently scarring, the activities will endanger the future of an entire people as well as scores of wildlife species, and there is no way to restrict it to just one sliver of the land, why is the right wing pushing so hard for something that will do little to nothing to cure our nation's energy dependence? Precedent. In a closed door meeting with fellow conservatives, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) spoke about the "symbolism involved in opening up the refuge to drilling" as well as the precedent the move will set. DeLay's comments reveal that drilling in ANWR is "a domino game that will lead to drilling in the Rocky Mountains, off the California coast and in the Gulf of Mexico." Watch out when the moratorium on eastern Gulf drilling expires in 2007.

GLOBAL LEADERSHIP
Wolfowitz Takes It to the Bank

President Bush yesterday surprised the world with his announcement that he was nominating Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz to be the next president of the World Bank. The World Bank is a 184-country institution that "has always operated by consensus." The president of the World Bank must be adept at forging international cooperation and building global compromise. Wolfowitz is a strange choice; at the Department of Defense, he was known for his go-it-alone attitude. His single-minded drive to invade Iraq and blatant disregard for building an international coalition before the war enraged and alienated much of Europe.

PLAYING WELL WITH OTHERS: This is President Bush's second aggressive nomination of a neocon hawk to an international body in the past week; last week, remember, he nominated the unilateralist, anti-U.N. John Bolton to be the U.S. ambassador to that very institution. It's in the best interests of the U.S. to work well with the World Bank, which, like the U.N., serves American interests by bringing stability to weak states, relieving the U.S. taxpayer of single-handedly taking on enormous burdens, and creating markets for our goods. Unfortunately, as the New York Times points out, "Like the nomination of John Bolton as United Nations ambassador, the choice of Mr. Wolfowitz is a slap at the international community, which widely deplored the invasion and the snubbing of the United Nations that accompanied it."

WHO NEEDS CONSENSUS?: The White House floated Wolfowitz's name to the international community a couple of weeks ago. The Bank's board made it clear to U.S. Treasury Secretary John Snow that their response "was unfavorable." According to the New York Times, after the U.S. suggested Wolfowitz, the Europeans also asked "that more than one name be presented." So what did President Bush do? He ignored their request completely and instead publicly announced Wolfowitz as his choice. One source "close to the Bank" charged the appointment shows that the U.S. government "couldn't care less what the rest of the world thinks."

BIG TROUBLE IN OLD EUROPE?: The United States is the largest shareholder in the World Bank; thus, the institution traditionally defers to the U.S. when it comes to the presidency. Wolfowitz, however, is such an unpopular choice that his nomination is already meeting rare resistance. The Times of London reports the surprising nomination "sparked howls of outrage from foes and a distinct lack of enthusiasm from friends" abroad, predicting a "potentially bruising fight with Washington over the post." The Washington Post agrees, reporting "speculation that a Wolfowitz candidacy could be torpedoed by the board of the bank." As German Development Minister Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul said, "The storm of enthusiasm in old Europe is muted."

HIS QUALIFICATIONS: The World Bank president needs to be an effective manager. The Wall Street Journal reports, however, that's not one of Wolfowitz's strengths. He "is widely viewed as an ineffective day-to-day manager who has had trouble getting the department to run smoothly." Middle East expert Anthony Cordesman agrees with that assessment, telling USA Today, "Far too often when he thinks he has the right policy solution, he doesn't get involved in the details."

THE NUMBERS: Paul Wolfowitz stubbornly refused to listen to others going into Iraq and his myopic views led to egregious mistakes. Remember, he's the one who infamously told Congress the war would basically pay for itself, saying, "we are dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction and relatively soon." Since then, the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars has reached nearly $300 billion. He attacked Gen. Eric Shinseki for suggesting the reconstruction of Iraq would take a couple hundred thousand troops, saying he was "wildly off the mark." L. Paul Bremer, the former head of the administration's Coalition Provisional Authority, however, admitted in October that "We paid a big price for not stopping it [the insurgency] because it established an atmosphere of lawlessness. We never had enough troops on the ground." Wolfowitz also has been criticized for pressuring intelligence agencies to produce false links between Saddam Hussein and 9/11, and reportedly approved unethical interrogation methods that led to torture in U.S. prisons.

Posted: 14 March 2005

This sounds like a fascinating book.

Lipstick and political resistance
Jennie Yabroff, Special to the Chronicle

New York -- Azadeh Moaveni opens the door to her cousin's Tribeca flat and immediately apologizes for her appearance. She looks great -- casually elegant in jeans and a tan sweater, but her face is coated in a layer of makeup, which is clearly making her uncomfortable. She quickly explains the glamour treatment is for a televised interview later in the day.

Though the makeup is hardly garish, just some foundation and neutral lipstick, it's fitting that Moaveni would feel the need to comment on it. In the three years she spent working in Tehran as a reporter for Time magazine, the 28-year-old writer became fascinated with the ways contemporary Iranian youths flaunt the dictates of the oppressive fundamentalist regime. Chief among their means of self-expression is the application of layer upon layer of cosmetics. As she writes in her memoir of her experience, "Lipstick Jihad," (PublicAffairs), she came to consider lipstick a subversive political tool.

This revelation is reflected in the book's title, which was inspired by an outing to the movies shortly after she arrived in Tehran. Instructed by a policewoman to wipe off her lipstick before entering the theater, Moaveni was struck by the nonchalance with which her female relatives removed and reapplied their cosmetics, adept at complying to the letter of the law while rebelling against its spirit.

READ THE REST.

From Grist on-line magazine.

Pollution from around the globe taints U.S. air and water

Even as battles rage in Washington, D.C., over controlling air pollution from domestic sources, dirty emissions from overseas are complicating the problem. Some 30 percent of the ozone in the U.S. may be drifting in from other countries, says NOAA scientist David Parrish. Dust from as far abroad as the Sahara Desert regularly travels across the Atlantic, increasing particulate levels in some U.S. cities. More worrisome is globe-trotting airborne mercury, chiefly from power plants and factories. It drifts around the world, settling in water bodies where it's absorbed by fish and then passed on up the food chain. Though the U.S. EPA estimates about 40 percent of mercury in the U.S. originates elsewhere, the U.S. last year opposed an international treaty that would have set mandatory mercury limits. Of course, the U.S. does its share of pollution exporting as well. It's a small world after all, and we're all (cough) neighbors now.

straight to the source: USA Today, Traci Watson, 14 Mar 2005

Eco-activists arrested for protesting near bank chief's home

Three activists with the Rainforest Action Network were arrested and fined earlier this month after posting signs on telephone poles and trees near the home of J.P. Morgan Chase CEO William Harrison. Designed to look like Old West "wanted" posters, the fliers read "Wanted -- William 'Billy the Kid' Harrison" and urged his neighbors to "ask him to do the right thing" by ending "investments of mass destruction and adopt[ing] environmental standards today." The fliers were meant to draw attention to the company's alleged financing of environmentally damaging projects like mining and logging. Within half an hour of posting them, the activists were charged with disturbing the peace and the fliers were removed. The American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut is looking into the arrests to determine if they violated free speech rights. "It definitely raises questions, because it appears to be a content-based arrest and that is constitutionally very problematic," said Annette Lamoreaux, an ACLU attorney.

straight to the source: The New York Times, Alison Leigh Cowan, 13 Mar 2005

straight to the source: Greenwich Time, Martin B. Cassidy, 09 Mar 2005

From The Center for American Progress

EDUCATION – WHEN RELIGION MEETS SCIENCE: It seems scientific reasoning is not what it used to be. After years of crafty strategizing orchestrated by conservatives, policymakers in nearly twenty states are now considering measures "that question the science of evolution." Though most do not seek to completely disavow the teaching of evolution, an overwhelming number of the proposals attempt to address the "gaps" in Darwinian theory by means of the intelligent design theory, which claims that the vast complexity of nature is evidence of the existence of a great cosmic "designer." Though many scientists are aghast at what is being called neocreationism, religious activists and anti-evolutionary scientists have long felt "persecuted" by the teaching of evolution and are now simply taking advantage of the opportunity provided by the Bush presidency, as President Bush himself believes the "jury is still out on evolution."

STATE WATCH – EVEN TAX BREAKS ARE BIGGER IN TEXAS: An $11 billion tax bill proposal currently on the floor of the Texas House includes a tax increase on bottled water but not liquor sales, which have not seen a tax increase in two decades. In fact, the tax bill is riddled with many such seemingly random tax breaks for one industry and tax increases on others. However, an analysis of the pattern reveals that "the largest political donors are the businesses that receive the biggest tax breaks or have their taxes left untouched." For example, the oil, gas, and petrochemical industry has given over $5 million in donations over the past two years and now stands to inherit $399 million in cuts. How will the everyday man fare if the bill passes? Individuals "earning less than $100,000 a year would pay a combined $1.1 billion a year more in taxes while those earning higher wages would receive a $437 million annual tax cut."

MEDIA
The White House Fakes It

Continued violence in Iraq, a struggling economy, an unpopular plan to privatize Social Security, homeland security left underfunded while the rich get giant tax cuts … what's a White House to do when the news about its policies isn't favorable? Fake it. An explosive, front-page New York Times story this weekend exposes President Bush's vast manipulation of the media and White House attempts to manipulate public opinion. Over the past four years, it turns out at least 20 different federal agencies have been involved in producing hundreds – yes, hundreds – of fake TV news segments, many of which were "subsequently broadcast on local stations across the country without any acknowledgement of the government's role in their production." In fact, since President Bush took office, the White House has spent at least $254 million on these fake segments and other public relations ploys to spread positive propaganda about his policies. President Bush has paid lip service to the concept of a free press, saying in January 2005, "there needs to be a nice, independent relationship between the White House and the press, the administration and the press." He also claimed "our agenda ought to be able to stand on its own two feet." Here's what happens when it can't:

LOSE YOUR IDENTITY: One of the largest concerns about these fake news segments is that they obscure the fact that they are paid for using taxpayer money and contain a one-sided, purely positive take on administration policy. In a now-infamous segment by the Department of Health and Human Services, a PR official named Karen Ryan posed as a reporter interviewing then-Secretary Tommy Thompson. (Her role in the well-rehearsed spot was to give Thompson "better, snappier answers" to her pre-approved questions.) The Government Accountability Office found the agency "designed and executed" her segments "to be indistinguishable from news stories produced by private sector television news organizations."

OFFICE OF B.S.: The Office of Broadcasting Services is a branch of the State Department which traditionally has acted as a clearinghouse for video from news conferences. That all changed three years ago. In 2002, "with close editorial direction from the White House," the unit started producing fake news segments to back up President Bush's rationale for going to war in Afghanistan and Iraq. As one senior official told Congress, the phony segments were "powerful strategic tools" used to influence public opinion. In all, the office produced nearly 60 segments, which were then distributed around the world for local stations to use as actual news footage. Although the White House has claimed ignorance about the use of fake news, it was well aware this was happening. A White House memo in January 2003 actually said segments the State Department disseminated about the liberation of Afghan women were "a prime example" of how "White-House led efforts could facilitate strategic, proactive communications in the war on terror."

IGNORE THE GAO: The Government Accountability Office (GAO) is a nonpartisan branch of Congress that investigates government fraud. The GAO criticized the administration's role in creating phony news three separate times in the past year, saying unless viewers are aware that what they're watching is government produced, it constitutes "covert propaganda." The GAO also forbade federal agencies from creating prepackaged news reports "that conceal or do not clearly identify for the television viewing audience that the agency was the source of those materials." The administration's response? The New York Times reports that on Friday, "the Justice Department and the Office of Management and Budget circulated a memorandum instructing all executive branch agencies to ignore the GAO findings."

IGNORE FEDERAL LAW: These fake news spots are produced with taxpayer money by outside public relations firms. Federal law warns federal agencies away from doing exactly that; the U.S. Code states "appropriated funds may not be used to pay a publicity expert unless specifically appropriated for that purpose." However, the GAO, which monitors the law, has no enforcement power. That responsibility lies with Congress and the White House. U.S. federal law also contains the Smith Mundt Act of 1948, which prohibits the spread of government propaganda in the United States (although it allows groups like Voice of America to broadcast it to foreign audiences.) According to the NY Times, State Department officials claim that provision doesn't apply to them.

Posted: 13 March 2005

From Grist on-line magazine.

Americans prefer their water clean, poll shows

"An overwhelming majority" -- some 86 percent -- of Americans believe clean, safe water is a national issue worthy of government spending, a new poll concludes. The two polling firms (one from each side of the partisan divide) conducting the opinion survey asked 900 adults a variety of questions related to hypothetical federal legislation creating a clean-water trust fund. The response favored the fund, with more than eight in 10 surveyed supporting the idea and some 71 percent picking clean-water programs over road construction and aviation projects as the most deserving of a trust fund. Two-thirds said they would rather the government spend more to guarantee clean water than cut taxes, and almost 80 percent would be more likely to vote for congressional representatives who supported the legislation. Says pollster Frank Luntz of the results, "Americans are sending their lawmakers a clear message."

straight to the source: Environment News Service, 07 Mar 2005

see also, in Grist: Frankly, They Do Give a Damn -- GOP pollster says voters want action on clean water -- in Muckraker

Republicans are after the Arctic Refuge again

Undeterred by consistent public opposition and bipartisan objections, a number of Republicans are once again attempting to get oil drillers into the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Senate Budget Committee Chair Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) slipped ANWR into a budget resolution yesterday, which unlike standard legislation cannot be defeated by a filibuster. Overcoming a filibuster requires 60 votes, but the budget resolution requires only a 51-vote majority. Senate Energy Committee Chair Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) called this the "old-fashioned way," but Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) countered that it is in fact a "backdoor way," a perversion of the budget process. On the House side, Republicans left ANWR out of the budget but vowed to include it in energy legislation next month. And at the head of the pack was President Bush, who touted plans to open ANWR to drilling in a major speech yesterday. In a turn of phrase creative even by his standards, he said ANWR would produce "the same amount of new oil we could get from 41 states combined." Many of those states, of course, have no known oil reserves.

straight to the source: Anchorage Daily News, Richard Mauer, 10 Mar 2005

straight to the source: Planet Ark, Reuters, Chris Baltimore, 10 Mar 2005

straight to the source: The Washington Post, Justin Blum and Jim VandeHei, 10 Mar 2005

straight to the source: The New York Times, David E. Sanger, 10 Mar 2005

From The Center for American Progress

CIVIL LIBERTIES – PENTAGON EXPANDS RENDITION: A Feb. 5 memorandum from Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld counsels support for a plan to transfer hundreds of suspected terrorists from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to prisons in Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Yemen. The transfers would be similar to the "renditions, or transfers of captives to other countries, carried out by the Central Intelligence Agency," a policy that exposes prisoners to abuse and violates the international Convention Against Torture (Article 3). Reports indicate the administration has already shipped prisoners off to Syria and Egypt, both of which are cited for their abuse of human rights and poor treatment of prisoners in the State Department's Human Rights Reports released last month. Rumsfeld appears to be trying to convince officials from the State and Justice departments to go along with the plan. Those agencies have "resisted some previous handovers, out of concern that transferring the prisoners to foreign governments could harm American security or subject the prisoners to mistreatment."

MILITARY – GHOSTS IN THE MACHINE: Senators yesterday expressed dismay and outrage over the fact that no senior Pentagon officials have been held accountable in the rampant cases of abuse at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. Now there's a new wrinkle. New, secret documents obtained by the Washington Post show "top military intelligence officers at the Abu Ghraib prison came to an agreement with the CIA to hide certain detainees at the facility without officially registering them." Keeping prisoners hidden, off the books, is in direct violation of international law. There have been reports of at least 100 "ghost" detainees held in prisons in Iraq, but the Pentagon previously said they must have just fallen through the cracks and weren't part of any official arrangement. Now, however, Army Lt. Col. Steven L. Jordan, second in command of intelligence gathering at Abu Ghraib, told investigators that his superior, Col. Thomas M. Pappas, put in motion a secret procedure in November 2003 to keep detainees off the books for the CIA. Pappas told investigators that Jordan was the one who facilitated the arrangement with the CIA in the first place.

SOCIAL SECURITY
Misinformation Mania

With White House privatization plans seemingly locked in a tailspin, conservatives are winding up their mighty howitzer of misinformation with one goal in mind: confusing Americans about the fundamental choices regarding retirement security. Some of their claims are so outlandish that a rebuttal seems unnecessary – take the new study blaming Social Security for hastening the decline of marriage, or President Bush's claim yesterday that private accounts would "provide a safety net for future retirees." Others have the potential to seriously mislead Americans about the president's plans. Below are five seriously specious claims to watch out for:

RED HERRING ALERT – THE "ADD-ON" MYTH: Last Friday, President Bush blurted "out something that sounded an awful lot like news" when he described his version of private accounts as "an add-on to that which the government is going to pay you." The truth: the "add-on" model of private accounts – creating an additional program completely apart from Social Security – is the polar opposite of the president's risky "carve-out" privatization scheme, which funds private accounts by raiding current Social Security payroll taxes. To see what a real add-on program looks like, see this report by American Progress fellow Gene Sperling.

RED HERRING ALERT – "BUT IT'S NOT PRIVATIZATION!": In his latest weekly e-mail, privatization pusher Rep. Allen Boyd (D-FL) claimed that "Many who oppose reforming the Social Security program have falsely claimed that personal accounts would lead to the privatization of Social Security." Sorry, but that line shouldn't fool anyone. "Personal" accounts carved out of Social Security are precisely what economists, analysts, and politicians – including President Bush – have always meant by privatization.

RED HERRING ALERT – CONSERVATIVE "COMPROMISE": Last week, two allies of President Bush offered up so-called "compromise" plans, attempting to corral pro-Social Security progressives who are actually interested in seriously addressing retirement security. A closer look reveals the plans are merely "Tangerine and Strawberry phase-out [plans] to be added to the plum version the president has already put on the table." Like the president's plan, both include massive, budget-busting transition costs, cuts to traditional Social Security benefits, and risky private accounts (One plan even raises the normal retirement age to 72 years old!).

RED HERRING ALERT – "ALL OPTIONS ARE ON THE TABLE": President Bush is firmly dedicated to pushing privatization. He continues to repeat the mantra that "all options are on the table," suggesting yesterday that he was the first president in history to take such an approach. The truth: The only option now on the table is the phase-out of Social Security through private accounts. Just this week, top White House economic adviser Allan Hubbard "rejected as 'absolutely a non-starter' bipartisan proposals that the administration put aside its drive" to create private accounts in favor of "add-on" versions.

RED HERRING ALERT – "IT'S ABOUT THE SOLVENCY": Hubbard also claimed on Monday that "President Bush's No. 1 goal is passing legislation that permanently solves the solvency problem." Looks like Hubbard spoke too soon. Earlier this week, Government Accountability Office chief David Walker testified before the House Ways and Means Committee that the president's private accounts "wouldn't shore up the system" and would actually "'exacerbate' the system's problems and accelerate the date for when it would start spending more on pension benefits than it receives in annual revenue."

BUDGET
The Fix Isn't In

Speaking in Alabama yesterday, President Bush repeated a familiar claim: "We're fixing the deficit." It doesn't matter how many times he says it – it's still not true. In fact, the president's most recent proposed budget would make the federal deficit much worse. A March 4 analysis by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reveals the president's budget would increase the deficit by $1.6 trillion over the next ten years. Most of the additional shortfall is a result of Bush's proposal to extend his 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for the rich. According to the CBO, new tax cuts proposed by Bush "would increase the deficit by more than $1.5 trillion in 2006 through 2015." Even these bleak numbers understate the scope of the fiscal crisis. The president's budget excludes all costs for continued operations in Iraq and Afghanistan – expected to cost at least $300 billion over the next 10 years – and so do the CBO estimates. The fact is, President Bush's policies are leaving an enormous tab that future generations will have to pick up. And he's not being honest about it. (Share your views on the president's budget on ThinkProgress.org.)

FROM BAD TO WORSE IN THE SENATE: Astoundingly, right-wing ideologues in the Senate have taken President Bush's uncompassionate, fiscally irresponsible budget and are making it worse. For example, the president has already drawn "sharp criticism from the nation's governors" for proposing $7.6 billion in cuts to health care funding for the poor (Medicaid) over the next five years. Now, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee is pursuing measures that could cut Medicaid by up to "$15 billion over five years." Nevertheless, the Senate plan still makes the deficit worse because tax cuts, along with increases in discretionary spending for defense and international affairs, "more than offset the proposed cuts in domestic programs." In fact, over a five-year period, the Senate plan, which adds $130 billion to the deficit, is actually worse than the president's plan, which adds a mere $104 billion over five years.

EVEN WORSE IN THE HOUSE: The only thing more irresponsible than the Senate proposal is the House proposal. The right-wing establishment in the House is pushing to cut health care funding for the poor by as much as $20 billion and nutrition programs for low-income families by as much as $5.3 billion. An additional $15 billion is slated to be cut from other essential programs for low-income Americans, like child care and disability assistance. Nevertheless, the House proposal provides for nearly $36 billion more in tax cuts for wealthy investors than the Senate. Like the president's plan and the Senate proposal, it also adds to the budget deficit by over $100 billion over the next five years.

THE ADMINISTRATION AND THE PEOPLE – DIFFERENT PRIORITIES: The budget priorities of the president and his right-wing allies are completely out of step with the rest of the country. A recent poll conducted by the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) found that Americans who were "presented a breakdown of the major areas of the proposed discretionary budget and given opportunity to redistribute it ... made major changes." Specifically, respondents favored "a significant reallocation toward deficit reduction, and increases in spending on education, job training, reducing reliance on oil and veterans." Respondents favored increasing funding for the U.N. and U.N. peacekeeping "an average of 207%, or $4.8 billion." Meanwhile, 63 percent "favored rolling back tax cuts for people with incomes over $200,000. Large majorities also favored cutting funding that financed "the capability for large scale nuclear wars, the number of nuclear weapons, and spending on developing new types of nuclear weapons."

ALERT: STOP THE PENTAGON'S WAR ON PUBLIC HEALTH & ENVIRONMENT The Pentagon is lobbying Congress to pass a new law that would allow the military to freely violate a host of environmental regulations. Entitled "The Readiness and Range Preservation Initiative," the legislation would allow military facilities to ignore laws like the Clean Air Act. The Pentagon claims environmental regulations are a threat to national security, since they restrict the military. The proposal comes on the heels of a sharply different bill sponsored by Senator Diane Feinstein of California that would hold the military responsible for cleaning up perchlorate pollution (rocket fuel), which has recently been discovered in 93% of the nation's lettuce and 97% of breast milk samples. Take action here: http://www.organicconsumers.org/perchlorate.htm

BIOPIRATES LOSE PATENT ON SEEDS OF INDIA'S SACRED TREE, THE NEEM Under the New World Order of the World Trade Organization (WTO), corporations now have the right to "discover" seeds and genetic materials used by indigenous peoples for centuries, and patent these materials, thereby obtaining monopoly rights to its products and profits. One such example is that of India's Neem Tree, traditionally considered a sacred tree, whose seeds have a fungicidal quality that has been common knowledge to the indigenous people of India for centuries. Despite this widespread traditional use, an American company, Thermo Trilogy, was able to obtain a patent on that process. In other words, using Neem Tree seeds as a fungicide suddenly became illegal, unless you paid Thermo Trilogy its royalties first. But last week, for the first time in history, a patent has been revoked as a matter of protecting traditional knowledge and practices. This landmark decision, made by the European Patent Office, is being celebrated in India and will likely inspire the reassessment of dozens of other similar patents. http://www.organicconsumers.org/patent/neemtree030905.cfm

SUPPORT TILLAMOOK CHEESE AGAINST MONSANTO INTIMIDATION (Issue #51) - On 2/25/2005, the OCA called on Bytes readers to support a large nationwide distributor of cheese that was considering going rBGH-free. Thanks in part to your action, despite threats by Monsanto, the Tillamook board of directors has voted to go rBGH-free. We hope this will inspire a chain reaction of other major dairy companies to do the same. http://www.organicconsumers.org/rbghlink.html

Ex-Marine Says Public Version of Saddam Capture Fiction

United Press International

A former U.S. Marine who participated in capturing ousted Iraqi President Saddam Hussein said the public version of his capture was fabricated.

Ex-Sgt. Nadim Abou Rabeh, of Lebanese descent, was quoted in the Saudi daily al-Medina Wednesday as saying Saddam was actually captured Friday, Dec. 12, 2003, and not the day after, as announced by the U.S. Army.

"I was among the 20-man unit, including eight of Arab descent, who searched for Saddam for three days in the area of Dour near Tikrit, and we found him in a modest home in a small village and not in a hole as announced," Abou Rabeh said.

"We captured him after fierce resistance during which a Marine of Sudanese origin was killed," he said.

He said Saddam himself fired at them with a gun from the window of a room on the second floor. Then they shouted at him in Arabic: "You have to surrender. ... There is no point in resisting."

"Later on, a military production team fabricated the film of Saddam's capture in a hole, which was in fact a deserted well," Abou Rabeh said.

Abou Rabeh was interviewed in Lebanon.

Posted: 4 March 2005

America's Senior Moment
By Paul Krugman

The grain of truth in questions about the meaning of the trust fund is that the rest of the federal budget has not been run responsibly. The Social Security surplus should have been kept in a "lockbox." Although this term has come in for a lot of derision, it was a useful shorthand way of saying that the federal government as a whole should in an average year run budget surpluses at least equal to the surplus of the Social Security system. And this in turn was a shorthand way of saying that the federal government as a whole should do the responsible thing and try to prepay some of the costs of an aging population.

In the 2000 campaign both candidates pledged to honor the lockbox. President Bush clearly never had any intention of honoring that pledge; his first tax cut would have broken the lockbox all by itself, and his insistence on pushing through another major tax cut after launching the Iraq war made it clear that this wasn't a fluke. But that's not a Social Security problem. Viewed on its own terms, Social Security has been run responsibly and is a sustainable system.

And the policy implication of that observation is also clear: the problem isn't with Social Security, it's with the rest of the budget. Social Security has already taken the steps needed to cope with an aging population; at most, it needs some minor tinkering. The main thing we need to do to cope with the demographic challenge is for the rest of the federal government to do its part, by dealing with the huge deficit we already have in the general fund.

...In the real world, the bond market would consider the solid fact of soaring debt a lot more significant than projections of savings through politically determined benefit cuts many decades in the future. In practice, privatization would significantly increase the risk that international investors will stop lending to the United States, provoking a fiscal crisis, sometime in the not too distant future.

...Privatizers hate it when you talk about fees—about the fact, for example, that the much-touted Chilean system has administrative costs about twenty times those of Social Security, or that according to Britain's Pensions Commission, "providers' charges" in that country's privatized system reduce the size of retirement nest eggs by between 20 and 30 percent.

...Investment companies gave lavishly to the inaugural celebrations, and are major contributors to the lobbying organizations that have been set up to push privatization. They aren't spending that money simply because they think privatization is in the public interest.

...If Bush-style privatization actually goes through, the end game is fairly predictable: it's what is happening in Britain now. A couple of decades from now, it will be obvious to everyone that the returns on private accounts have fallen far short of expectations, and that America is about to experience a resurgence of poverty among the elderly. There will be irresistible demands for the government to call off cuts in benefit levels. (Remember, the over-sixty-five population will be an even larger share of the electorate than it is now.) And the result will be to make the fiscal outlook much worse than it would have been without privatization: the government will have borrowed trillions of dollars with the promise of future budget savings, but those savings will never materialize.

...Today we expect the public sector to pay for essential care when individuals cannot pay, and we do so for good reason. Imagine the inequalities that would already exist in America if Medicare wasn't there: high-income Americans would receive hip replacements and bypass surgery in their old age, while low-income Americans would find themselves crippled or dead. Yet the cost of preventing fundamental inequalities in medical care will grow over time.

...when it comes to health care, the free-market ideology that currently dominates American political discourse seems utterly wrong. Systems that provide universal coverage, like those of France or Canada, are much cheaper to run than our market-based system, yet they yield better results with respect to life expectancy and infant mortality. Or if you don't trust foreign examples, consider the remarkable renaissance of the Veterans' Administration hospital system, described in an important article by Phillip Longman in the February Washington Monthly: he shows that the VA system's centralization of information and control over resources allow it to provide better care at lower costs than any private system.

READ THE REST.

From Grist on-line magazine.

HAZY DELAYS OF WINTER
Clear Skies bill still bottled up in Senate committee

Help -- Clear Skies has fallen, and it can't get up! President Bush's "Clear Skies" legislation is stuck in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. Committee Chair James Inhofe (R-Okla.) has delayed a vote on the bill three times, most recently yesterday, each time realizing that it's still deadlocked at a 9-9 split. The vote has now been rescheduled for March 9; an Inhofe spokesflack said that it has to happen by March 15 or the bill is likely toast for this year. As the bill's prospects look more and more, uh, cloudy, the Bushies are gearing up to try to replicate its effects through executive rulemaking and regulatory maneuvers (ah, democracy). Mercury regulations that enviros have been so vocal in criticizing can get done that way, as can the market-based incentives to reduce smog and acid rain-forming emissions, which just about everybody supports. However, without congressional approval, the administration can't take the controversial step of rolling back new-source review rules that require power plants to install new pollution-control equipment.

straight to the source: Los Angeles Times, Miguel Bustillo, 04 Mar 2005

From The Center for American Progress

JUDICIARY
Reverse Boyle's Nomination

President Bush once claimed he would be a "uniter, not a divider." You wouldn't know it by his judicial nominees. Bush has continued to re-nominate radical, activist judges who have been strongly opposed by mainstream America. Case in point: Terrence Boyle, whose nomination hearings for the Fourth Circuit began yesterday. Boyle has been vociferously opposed by civil rights groups and disability groups for his extreme decisions to weaken civil rights and disability rights. Boyle's high reversal rate even in non-ideological cases is a mark of mediocrity. None of this has the president particularly concerned; turning a blind eye to Boyle's record, President Bush in January said: "[Judge Terrence Boyle is] an exceptional candidate for the appeals court…He'd make a superb addition to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, and he is vitally needed on that court." The following shows why he is wrong:

REVERSING BOYLE: Judge Boyle, a former Jesse Helms protιgι, has been trying to win a seat on this court since he was first nominated in 1991. The problem? He's just not a very good judge. The Fourth Circuit is considered one of the most conservative circuits in the entire country and even it has repeatedly found Boyle to be too radical in his judgments. The Fourth Circuit has had to reverse Boyle's decisions a whopping 150 times for errors in judgment and fundamental legal mistakes.

BOYLE AGAINST MINORITIES: Boyle is opposed by a large number of groups for his dismal civil rights record. For example, during the 1990 redistricting of North Carolina, the state created a congressional district to reflect the strong African-American population of the area. Boyle tried to block the district's creation and twice declared it unconstitutional. His decision was reversed twice by the Supreme Court. The first time, writing for a unanimous court , Justice Clarence Thomas found Boyle's ruling was "clearly erroneous." The Supreme Court sent the case back to Judge Boyle and his colleagues. Judge Boyle wrote another opinion reprinting large swaths of the first one the Supreme Court had rejected. The Supreme Court rejected Boyle's view again. Boyle also has a record of siding with employers in cases of workplace discrimination. In Whiting v. Ski's Auto World, Boyle ruled against an employee who had been passed over for promotion because of his race; the Fourth Circuit again overturned his decision. In Godon v. North Carolina Crime Control & Pub. Safety, "a boot camp counselor claimed that her supervisors violated her First Amendment rights when they fired her for complaining about the treatment of black and female cadets." Boyle dismissed the case because he found the counselor's speech was not protected by the First Amendment, "but rather merely a personal expression of dissatisfaction." A unanimous Fourth Circuit reversed him.

BOYLE AGAINST THE DISABLED: Appellate courts have repeatedly criticized Boyle for his overreaching attacks against the Americans with Disabilities Act. Boyle has tried to undermine the constitutionality of the ADA. He has tried to exempt state agencies from following the federal anti-discrimination laws. In Williams v. Channel Master Satellite Systems, Inc., for example, Boyle ruled working was "not a major life activity" which should be protected by the ADA. In reversing his ruling, the Fourth Circuit said of Boyle's declaration that "while some courts might entertain claims under the 'major life activity' of 'working,' this Court does not."

BOYLE AGAINST WOMEN: Boyle has a record of undermining workplace discrimination laws. In one of the most egregious examples, United States v. North Carolina, Boyle fought to protect North Carolina's right to discriminate against women in the workplace, claiming the state should be exempt from federal laws protecting the rights of women because the anti-bias laws were somehow against the state's "culture." The Fourth Circuit overturned Boyle's nonsensical decision, stating his ruling "constituted an abuse of discretion."

GROUPS AGAINST BOYLE: The National Bar Association (NBA), a national network of African-American lawyers working together to protect civil and political rights, is strongly opposed to Boyle's nomination. In a letter to Sen. Arlen Specter yesterday, the group said it found Judge Boyle "not qualified" for appointment, saying, "Judge Boyle has not reigned in his judicial activism to apply an appropriate judicial balance." North Carolina cops don't like Boyle. The North Carolina Police Benevolent Society opposes the nomination over a series of rulings. In both Kirby v. Elizabeth City and Morrash v. Strobel, Boyle dismissed cases brought by police officers who were penalized for telling the truth in court, ruling their testimonies were not protected by the First Amendment. The National Employment Lawyers Association "strongly opposes" him for his record against workers' rights.

STATE WATCH
The Outrage in Ohio

If you want an example of the radical right-wing agenda being pursued by conservatives across the country, look no further than the Buckeye State. In Ohio, Gov. Bob Taft (R) is proposing slashing taxes for the state's wealthiest residents and most profitable businesses. Taft proposes making up the revenue shortfall by slashing health care for the elderly, ending services for the mentally disabled, and increasing the burden on small businesses and the middle class. Of course, what would you expect from a plan written by "the Ohio Business Roundtable, a coalition of corporate executives that enlisted Ernst & Young" to write a plan that would benefit them the most. Here's a closer look at what's going on in Ohio:

THE REVERSE ROBIN HOOD TAX PROPOSAL: Under Taft's income tax proposal – which would blow a $2 trillion hole in the state budget by 2010 – Ohioans making less than $16,000 a year (the bottom 20 percent) will receive an average tax cut of $12. Meanwhile, the "the 1 percent of Ohio taxpayers who make at least $274,000 a year with an average income of $643,000 would save an average $8,464 a year." The top 1 percent would receive "considerably more than all Ohio taxpayers making less than $43,400 - the bottom 60 percent of all those in the state - would receive." The tax cuts for the wealthy are partially off-set by regressive taxes that disproportionately affect the poor and the middle class. For example, the tax on beer and wine in Ohio would double, sales taxes would increase, and $2 a month would be added to everyone's electricity bill.

SLASHING SERVICES FOR THE POOR, THE SICK AND THE DISABLED: Another way Taft proposes financing his tax cuts for the wealthy: cutting vital services for Ohio's most vulnerable. Taft plans to propose "ending Medicaid health coverage for 40,000 low-income Ohioans," including the elderly. He also is calling for the elimination of "a state and federally funded program that provides $300 million a year in services to Ohioans with mental retardation or development disability." The program pays for "physical therapy, nursing care, speech therapy and other medical services." The termination of the program would also harm Ohio schools, which are required by federal law to provide services for the developmentally disabled, and currently receive $67 million a year from the program.

REGRESSIVE CORPORATE TAX PROPOSAL HURTS SMALL BUSINESS: The tax plan is also opposed by the larger Ohio business community, including the Ohio Chamber of Commerce. Taft's plan reduces existing corporate taxes and replaces them with a complex corporate activities tax (CAT). The CAT "is like a sales tax [and]...likely to fall more heavily on lower and middle-income taxpayers." Taft's corporate tax bill would also shift some taxation from profits, to sales – benefiting Ohio's richest corporations but hurting small businesses, which generally operate on smaller margins. The problem with Taft's proposal is that it "automatically raises a company's tax liability for every dollar increase in sales, regardless of profitability."

Under the Radar

CONSERVATIVES – DELAY'S EUROPEAN VACATION: House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) is in mired in yet another ethics scandal. The latest: DeLay, his wife, and conservative lobbyist Jack Abramoff went on a whirlwind tour of Europe in 2000, staying in posh hotels and eating lavish meals. The trip was supposedly paid for by the conservative National Center for Public Policy Research. New disclosures, however, show Jack Abramoff – who is currently enmeshed in his own ethics violations concerning pulling in money from both sides of an Indian gambling issue – may have actually paid for some of DeLay's expenses. Legally, that's a clear "violation of House ethics rules, which prohibit members from having their travel paid for by a registered lobbyist." Though the National Center purports that they were "careful to pay all the expenses associated" with the trip, Abramoff reportedly listed some of DeLay's expenses – for example, a $4,285 hotel bill – as well as his own when asking his law firm to reimburse him for the trip.

MILITARY – BOYKIN'S BLUNDER: Remember Gen. William Boykin, the James Dobson of the U.S. Army? In late 2003, Gen. Boykin made headlines when tapes showed him describing the war on terrorism as a battle between a "Christian nation" – the United States – and Satan. During one talk, he recalled a Muslim fighter in Somalia, saying, "I knew that my God was a real God, and his was an idol." At the time, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld defended the remarks, saying Boykin was just exercising his rights to free speech and "that's the wonderful thing about our country." According to the New York Times, however, the Army's inspector general felt differently. A report completed in August 2004 found Boykin had "violated several Pentagon rules in delivering" the speeches, and recommended the officer be subjected to "appropriate corrective action." An Army representative told the Times "that it had taken action against General Boykin, but it declined to provide details or to say what rules he had violated."

JUSTICE – CODDLING WHITE COLLAR CROOKS: White collar criminals who failed to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in penalties are still maxin' and relaxin' in the lap of luxury, a new congressional investigation shows. The five criminals covered by the study – all "high-ranking officials of companies" or business owners – were wealthy before the judgments, but "claimed later they did not have the money to pay full restitution to their victims." Funny, that. As the congressional report shows, "several continued living in million-dollar homes, and two took overseas trips while on supervised release." Now, since so much time has passed between their crimes and the judgments, "prospects are not good for collecting additional restitution." And you thought Martha had it good!

Posted: 2 March 2005

From Grist on-line magazine. This is exactly the sort of thing I expected from the unPatriot Act. I disagree with groups that commit crimes of arson or sabotage, but I more strongly disagree with stretching the ue of this misbegotten law. There are enough laws on the books already to deal with situations like this.

AND YOU THOUGHT CLINTON LIKED HUMMERS
Feds using terrorism excuse to crack down on eco-activists

The U.S. government is using the Patriot Act to go after radical environmental activists -- and some unfortunate folks who just happen to look like them -- by branding them as "terrorists." Despite the fact that the Earth Liberation Front has caused no injuries during its acts of sabotage and arson over the years, the FBI told U.S. senators that the group and others like it are "a domestic terrorism investigative priority." One FBI agent says President Bush himself called to inquire about a 2003 incident in Southern California in which Hummers were torched or defaced at a dealership, acts for which ELF claimed responsibility. Thanks to the Patriot Act, groups or individuals deemed terrorists lose several constitutional protections and can be surveilled without a warrant. "It's a ludicrous extension of the word terrorist," says professor Steven Best of the University of Texas at El Paso, who has written about the animal-rights movement. "It drains it of any meaning."

straight to the source: The Guardian, Peter Huck, 02 Mar 2005

IT'S NOT WATCHING CARS GO IN CIRCLES THAT DOES IT
NASCAR race-cars spew lead

What's the connection between NASCAR racing, diminished mental capacity, and increased criminal behavior? If your answer was "lead," well, we commend your high-mindedness. Indeed, that is the answer: Though leaded gasoline was phased out in the U.S. decades ago, the racing industry (along with aviation) was exempted. Despite years of pleas from the U.S. EPA, NASCAR has not developed an alternative to leaded gas, which it says keeps engine valves lubricated. "We just have not been able to find a solution," said NASCAR spokesguy Ramsey Poston. Lead from auto exhaust can stay in the air for up to 10 days and travel many miles. Those in the most danger are children, for whom lead presents the threat of permanently diminished mental capacity. Low-level lead exposure has also been linked to criminal behavior. NASCAR is the fastest-growing "sport" in America, with some 3.5 million spectators a year attending races. (Look, we made it all the way through the blurb without saying "Bush" or "red state"! Oh, oops.)

straight to the source: Scripps Howard News Service, Joan Lowy, 28 Feb 2005

From The Center for American Progress

SOCIAL SECURITY – CAN'T BUY OUR LOVE: President Bush is finding out that $35 million doesn't buy what it used to. Despite every attempt made by the Bush administration to scare the American people into a frenzy over Social Security, it seems that nobody is quite ready to drink the Kool-Aid. Even leading conservatives in both the House and the Senate are less and less fervently supporting the president's ill-conceived overhaul, and are already tucking in their tails by expressing reluctance to bring the issue to the floor before 2006. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) was correct in stating that "Bush's public campaigning has begun to show results"; recent polls show the public is becoming more and more skeptical of his plan. And while House Majority Leader Tom DeLay states that "opponents of the President's plans 'are better organized,'" it is actually that they are just better informed.

CONGRESS – BANKRUPTCY BILL BOMBSHELLS: It's hard to believe the anti-consumer bankruptcy bill currently snaking its way through Congress could get any worse, but according to the New York Times, it does. Already, the bill makes it "harder for families struck by financial misfortune to get back on track," a malicious goal especially considering nine out of 10 bankruptcies "are triggered by the loss of a job, high medical bills or divorce." Now the Times reports the legislation also enshrines "an increasingly popular loophole" that lets the wealthiest Americans protect their assets from creditors even after filing for bankruptcy. Moreover, yesterday Senate Republicans "beat back" a Democratic amendment to the bill aimed at protecting U.S. soldiers from the most harmful effects of the legislation. Write your senators today and tell them to reject the legislation in its current form.

So much for the myth of the "education president".

BUDGET
Bush Eviscerates Education

President Bush heads to Anne Arundel Community College in Arnold, MD, today to play lip service to his record on job training and higher education. It's true, education is the most sure-fire way for millions of Americans to lift themselves out of a cycle of poverty and strife. But President Bush has a dirty secret: to help fund his expensive tax breaks for the wealthy, in his most recent budget he actually slashed money from vital job training programs, college loans, vocational education, adult education and literacy programs. Instead of getting real education opportunities, under President Bush, millions of Americans now will lose out. While listening to today's speech in Maryland, keep in mind the following reality:

PITIFUL PELL GRANTS: President Bush is expected to tout his new plan to increase funding for Pell Grants. It's too little, too late. Despite soaring tuition costs, over the past three years President Bush has frozen the Pell Grants at $4,050. His new budget would raise the grant by only $100 in each of the next five years, well short of his 2000 campaign pledge to hike the grant to $5,100. On top of that, President Bush is also supporting a new formula for calculating student eligibility that "will eliminate federal Pell Grants for up to 80,000 to 90,000 low-income students." It will also affect funding levels; about "1.3 million students will see reductions of $100 to $300 per year." The president's proposals are not sufficient to meet the rising costs of higher education, so now it's up to Congress to act. Write your representatives today and tell them to increase the Pell Grant maximum to at least $4,500 this year.

FEELING THE PERKINS LOSS: President Bush's 2006 budget will eliminate the Perkins Loan Program, which gives money to colleges, including community colleges, to allow them to make low-interest loans available to needy students. Last year, it helped about 673,000 students from low- and middle-income families afford college. The Perkins program is also used for vocational education and job training classes. The elimination of the Perkins grant is a devastating blow to Maryland community colleges. Montgomery College, for example, will lose nearly $500,000 from this cut; the institution uses this money for wheelchairs for its physical therapy assistant program, equipment for its nursing program and health information technology software. Howard Community College, another local school, stands to lose $175,000 annually. In the past, that funding paid for tutoring, disability support and job programs aimed at low-income students.

CUTTING ADULT EDUCATION: Today, "more than 51 million American out-of-school youth and adults lack a high school diploma or GED, and 29 million are in need of English language services." President Bush, however, is proposing cutting funding for these programs almost 75 percent, from $501.1 million to $131.4 million. According to the Center for Law and Social Policy, that means "nearly half a million people - at least 470,000 - would be denied literacy, Adult Basic Education, GED, and English as a Second Language services due to the President's proposed budget cuts." For example, President Bush wants to eliminate Even Start, the national education program that helps adults learn to read or obtain their GEDs as well providing literacy classes for low-income children. The president tried to eliminate this program last year - it was saved after a public outcry. Another program under the knife: the National Farmworkers Job Program. The $76 million program, which the president has tried to eliminate for the past three years in a row, helps migrant workers learn English and obtain high school diplomas. Without it, these workers will lose the opportunity to qualify for better jobs and rise out of poverty.

EVISCERATING JOB TRAINING: President Bush wants to chop half a billion dollars out of federal job training funding. Federal job training programs, including dislocated-worker training programs, will be cut by $200 million. Also, federal aid to states for job training, which includes funding to help veterans re-enter the workforce, will be cut by $300 million.

CUTTING YOUTH EMPLOYMENT: Instead of working to provide opportunities to young people in inner cities, President Bush worked to smother a vital program which provided youth job training. In the 2004 budget he presented in 2003, President Bush proposed eliminating all funding for Youth Opportunity Grants, a program that gives job training to young people. In 2002, that program was funded at $225 million; in 2003, Bush proposed funding only $45 million ($43.5 million was actually funded); and in the 2004 budget, he proposed its elimination. Congress accepted his recommendation and funding has been eliminated.

Posted: 1 March 2005

From organicconsumers.org

STOP FACTORY DAIRY FARMS FROM LABELING THEIR PRODUCTS AS ORGANIC
The battle to safeguard organic standards is coming to a head next week (March 1-3) at the meeting of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) in Washington, D.C. The board will be addressing the issue of livestock standards, specifically the controversy surrounding "factory dairy feedlots" marketing their products as "organic." Ignoring USDA organic standards that require regular access to natural pasture for cows, intensive confinement feedlots with thousands of cows in Idaho, Colorado, and California are currently labeling and selling their products as organic. Wisconsin's Cornucopia Institute has filed a formal complaint against several of these factory farm operations, including Horizon Organic, the largest organic dairy brand in the U.S. Horizon is owned by Dean Foods, the nation's largest dairy conglomerate. It is important that the NOSB hear from as many consumers as possible on this issue. Studies have shown that grass-fed cows are healthier, and that their meat and dairy products are nutritionally superior to grain-fed cows reared in feedlots. Take action here: http://www.organicconsumers.org/nosb.htm

SUPPORT TILLAMOOK CHEESE AGAINST MONSANTO INTIMIDATION br>Tillamook, an Oregon-based nationwide distributor of cheese, has announced it plans to require that all of its dairy farmers stop injecting their cows with Bovine Growth Hormone, a drug banned in Europe and most industrialized countries. In response, Monsanto, the producer of the controversial genetically engineered animal drug, rBGH (recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone), has threatened to sue Tillamook. Tillamook's farmers will vote on banning rBGH at their meeting Monday, Feb. 28 at 10:00 a.m. Please contact Tillamook as soon as possible and tell them to stay rBGH-free. Take action here: http://www.organicconsumers.org/rbgh/tillamook.cfm

From The Center for American Progress

REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS – UNDERMINING WOMEN'S RIGHTS WORLDWIDE: It seems the White House has been making calls in support of undermining women's rights to a global audience. Beginning today, a United Nations meeting of "over 100 countries and 6,000 advocates for women's causes" will evaluate what progress countries have made in implementing a 1995 platform that called "for governments to end discrimination against women and close the gender gap in 12 critical areas including health, education, employment, political participation and human rights." Unfortunately, a declaration of reaffirmation of the platform's goals is being singlehandedly held up by the United States delegation, which will only agree to sign on if the document does "not create any new international human rights and [does not] include the right to abortion." It is interesting that the United States spokesman continues to assert that the proposed amendment changes "are consistent with U.S. government views" while at the same time trying to undermine the Beijing document that states "women have the right to 'decide freely and responsibly on matters related to their sexuality…free of coercion, discrimination and violence.'"

WORLD BANK – WOLFOWITZ FOR PRESIDENT: The Financial Times reports that Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, a prime architect of the war on Iraq, has emerged as a leading candidate to head the World Bank. The Times notes Wolfowitz would be a "highly controversial" choice for the position, in no small part due to his flagrant misjudgments and extreme positions over the last several years. Wolfowitz has been criticized for pressuring intelligence agencies to produce false links between Saddam Hussein and 9/11, attacking Gen. Shinseki's troop estimates as "wildly off the mark," holding up funds for Iraq reconstruction, and reportedly approving the harsh interrogation methods that led to abuse and torture in U.S. prisons. Current bank President James Wolfensohn, appointed twice by President Clinton, was known for "bully[ing] the bank's staff and board into changing the bank's focus toward a greater emphasis on alleviating poverty"; last month, the Washington Post described Wolfensohn as "eager to stay on well past June, when his term expires, but increasingly resigned to the prospect that the Bush team would prefer to replace him with someone else."

MEDIA – COME WITH ME IF YOU WANT TO SHILL: Arnold Schwarzenegger is starring in another horrible sequel, though this one is straight-to-T.V. The Los Angeles Times reports that California Gov. Schwarzenegger's administration used taxpayer dollars to produce a "mock news story" that pushes a government-backed, corporation-friendly proposal that would kill mandatory lunch hours. The report comes days after the Government Accountability Office sharply warned federal agencies against producing similar propaganda videos, which the Bush administration was caught doing twice in the last two years. Eighteen stations ran the Schwarzenegger spots as news reports, complete with a positive promo text for the local anchors which read: "If approved, the changes would clear up uncertainty in the business community and create a better working environment throughout the state." Never mentioned was the fact that organized labor opposes the rule change, nor that the proposal is backed by the California Restaurant Assn., "which donated $21,000 to one of Schwarzenegger's campaign funds last year and provided food for his 2003 inauguration."

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT – FINING FREE SPEECH AWAY: In laying out his agenda for the Justice Department, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales declared the aggressive prosecution of obscenity cases as one of his top priorities and stated "obscene materials are not protected by the First Amendment." Similar to his predecessor John Ashcroft – under his purview, the DOJ spent thousands of dollars to cover up Justice – Gonzales is determined to impose a moral cleansing that has left people questioning the government rather than the so-called violators. In response to the Bush administration-backed House measure approving a significant increase in the maximum FCC fine to $500,000, Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) said that the real victims of such legislation were "free expression and First Amendment rights," declaring that passage of the bill would "make America a less free society." If the bill passes, in comparison to the fines levied by other agencies, "Bono saying 'f-ing brilliant' on the air would carry the exact same penalty as illegally testing pesticides on human subjects."

CONSUMER RIGHTS
Charge the Senate

This week the credit card industry – which raked in $30 billion in profits last year – storms the Congress in an attempt to squeeze a few more dimes from Americans who are sick or out of work. Starting today the Senate will consider a bill (S. 256) that would amend bankruptcy law to "make it harder for families struck by financial misfortune to get back on track." (Nine out of 10 bankruptcies "are triggered by the loss of a job, high medical bills or divorce.) The bill is supported in Congress by a bipartisan coalition on the credit industry dole. They think they can pass the bill without the American people noticing. Prove them wrong. Write your senators and tell them to reject the legislation in its current form.

MORE UNNECESSARY BUREAUCRACY: The bankruptcy bill is an attempt to prevent people from filing Chapter 7 bankruptcy – which gives people a clean slate – and make them file under Chapter 13, which requires continued payments to the credit card companies. In order to qualify for Chapter 7, Americans would be forced to complete a costly and bureaucratic means test. This additional red tape is almost completely unnecessary. According to a study commissioned by the nonpartisan American Bankruptcy Institute, 96.4 percent of people who file Chapter 7 can't afford to pay anything more. The real intent of the legislation is not to prevent people from abusing the system but to make it so burdensome to become eligible for Chapter 7 that people who would qualify can't afford it.

LIKE TAKING MONEY FROM A BABY: There is seemingly no limit to the depths to which the credit industry will go to seek an extra buck. The bill they are trying to push through Congress threatens the welfare of children by endangering child support. If a custodial parent is owed child support from someone declaring bankruptcy, the parent will be forced to fight with other creditors (like auto lenders) for the debtor's limited income – even after the bankruptcy is completed.

GIVING MILLIONAIRES A PASS: The bill on the Senate floor right now doesn't stop some of the worst abuses of our bankruptcy system. In several states – including the president's home in Texas – a multimillionaire can declare bankruptcy, avoid his debts, and still keep his palatial estate. We've seen it happen time and again: for example, "Marvin Warner, a former ambassador to Switzerland and the owner of a failed Ohio Savings & Loan, who paid off only a fraction of $300 million in bankruptcy claims while keeping his multi-million-dollar horse ranch near Ocala, Florida." Another example: "Dallas developer, Talmadge Wayne Tinsley, who filed under chapter 7 after incurring $60 million in debts. Tinsley objected to the Texas law that permitted him to keep only one acre of his $3.5 million, 3.1-acre magnolia-lined estate. But that acre included a five-bedroom, six-and-a-half-bath mansion with two studies, a pool and a guest house." The 2001 bankruptcy bill at least stopped these abuses by capping the so-called "homestead exemption" at $125,000. This bill has a complicated exemption that will allow "wealthy debtors who are sophisticated enough to plan ahead – and those are, after all, the people we are talking about – can purchase a homestead to shelter their non-exempt assets and simply wait [49 months] before filing their petition."

THE WRONG BILL AT THE WRONG TIME: The bill, which would make it harder for people to recover from financial problems, comes at exactly the wrong time. More Americans families are struggling because median income is stagnant, health care costs are skyrocketing, college tuition has exploded and child care costs are up. Once families are hit with big medical bills or family members lose their jobs, bankruptcy is often their only option.

UNCHECKED ABUSE BY CREDIT CARD INDUSTRY: The surge in bankruptcies has been brought on, in no small part, by the credit industry's own predatory lending practices. In 2001, credit card companies sent 5 billion solicitations for credit to American homes. Between 1993 and 2000, the industry increased credit extended to the public from $777 billion to almost $3 trillion. Once the consumer accepts, the companies are allowed to change their interest rates at any time for any reason. Many follow a practice of "universal default" which means any drop in your credit score – which can be triggered by missing a single payment on your electric bill – can lead to a significant rate increase.

JUDGES
The Anti-Environment Activist

The Senate is scheduled tomorrow to hold a hearing on the nomination of "anti-environmental activist" William G. Myers III to a seat on the 9th Circuit of the federal judiciary. Conservatives are calling efforts to block this nomination "obstructionist." In reality, Myers is an unqualified choice with a long record of hostility toward environmental protections. Myers has drawn opposition from nearly every corner; last year his nomination was blocked after 180 different groups – civil rights, labor, Native American and virtually every environmental organization across the board – came out against his appointment. Here's a look at the Myers activist record:

THE HOSTILE ACTIVIST: Myers has made numerous public statements regarding his philosophy on the federal government's role in protecting the environment. He also attacked the 1994 California Desert Protection Act, which set aside land for two national parks and protected millions of acres of wilderness, as "an example of legislative hubris." In 1996, he also charged that federal management of public lands was comparable with "'the tyrannical actions of King George in levying taxes' on American colonists." He has said there's "no constitutional basis" to protect wetlands. He also railed that "environmentalists are mountain biking to the courthouse as never before, bent on stopping human activity whenever it may promote health, safety and welfare." The cases he was talking about "involved logging on national forests, racial discrimination in the placement of waste treatment plants and protection of irrigation canals from toxic chemicals."

A GOLD MINE FOR CORPORATE INTERESTS: While at the Department of the Interior, Myers drafted a ruling in an attempt to change regulations to allow a foreign-owned gold mine to be established on Indian land in California. The proposed Glamis Imperial Mine Project would be a "1,600-acre open-pit gold mine located in the environmentally sensitive and culturally significant California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA) and infringing on parts of the Quechan Indian Nation's sacred ancestral lands." The devastation to the land would be enormous, but according to estimates, "the mine would produce only one ounce of gold for every 280 tons of rock disturbed." Also, federal regulations prohibit any activity on the protected CDCA which could cause "undue impairment." Myers twisted that, arguing that the term "undue impairment" was meaningless, too vague to enforce; thus, he said, the mine was allowed. His opinion was later shot down by a federal judge who ruled it twisted the "clear mandate" of federal law to prevent the degradation of land.

LAND GIVEAWAYS: In June 2003, as the chief lawyer for the Interior Department, Myers prodded two congressmen from Northern California to introduce a bill "that would have given away $1 million worth of public land near this city north of Sacramento to a private firm." In 2000, Yuba River Properties was caught mining public land. The company claimed it owned the land; Myers eagerly championed the company's claim. Without bothering to consult officials in the Department of the Interior, he sent two California congressmen a memo saying the Interior Department would support legislation to officially give the land to the company for free. The deal finally fell apart when it came to light that Yuba River had never paid taxes on the land it claimed to own and, in fact, Interior agents in the California office were able to produce "readily available documents" proving the land was indeed owned by the government. As Timothy Carroll, an official in the California office, said in an e-mail to a coworker, "Turns out Solicitor William G. Myers III suggested this solution to [the congressmen]. Would have been nice if he had asked us first."

THE ROBBINS CASE: Myers has also been the subject of a two-year investigation for turning a blind eye to the actions of a well-connected Wyoming rancher named Frank Robbins. While Myers was solicitor at the Department of the Interior, Robbins enjoyed "virtually carte blanche authority to violate federal grazing laws." A federal report found the deputy director of the Bureau of Land Management, Myers's associate solicitor and another unnamed lawyer in his solicitor's office "failed to act impartially and gave preferential treatment to Mr. Robbins in negotiating and crafting" a settlement in grazing rights violations on federal land.

QUESTIONABLE LEGAL QUALIFICATIONS: Myers is a strange choice for a top federal judgeship position. He's never been on the bench, and the American Bar Association's judicial screening committee wasn't bowled over by his legal record. Not a single person on the 15-member panel rated him "well qualified." More than a third actually rated him as "not qualified," the lowest possible rating. As California's San Jose Mercury put it, "Myers's record on the environment is weak; his other legal experience is not broad enough to compensate. Environmentally conscious Republicans should join Democrats in opposing him."

FOREVER LOBBYIST: Before his position in President Bush's Department of the Interior, Myers was a long-time lobbyist for "ranching, mining and timber interests." He spent years fighting to "impede Clinton administration efforts to preserve endangered species, safeguard wilderness and protect public lands from overgrazing." While in the administration, his ties to the industry remained strong. According to analysis, Myers repeatedly met with industry lobbyists while at the Interior Department. He sat down with representatives from grazing, mining and other industries at least 32 times while solicitor. In that same time, he met with one single environmentalist.

HUMAN RIGHTS
The Two-Faced White House

The State Department released its annual report documenting human rights abuses in countries around the globe. A total of 196 different countries were cited in this year's report; over 70 countries had human rights records described as "poor." (An examination of tactics used by the United States is not included in the annual report.) Some were countries with chronic abuse records, such as North Korea, Syrian and Iran. Others, like Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, are currently among the White House's key allies. Sadly, this year's report won't carry as much sting or influence as in years past. Many of the tactics countries are being censured for are in use by the Bush White House. That, unfortunately, has drastically undercut the moral authority of the United States to compel autocratic nations to comply with human rights standards.

THROWING STONES FROM A GLASS HOUSE: The State Department criticized countries for what it called "torture," including "sleep deprivation for detainees, confining prisoners in contorted positions, stripping and blindfolding them and threatening them with dogs." These are all methods, however, which have been approved "by the Bush administration for use on detainees in U.S. custody." For example, in 2002, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld signed off on stripping detainees at Guantanamo Bay and using dogs to terrorize them. Much of the legal framework for torture was set up in a series of memos approved by former White House counsel – and current Attorney General – Alberto Gonzales.

THE DIRTY SECRET OF RENDITION: The State Department also harshly criticized Syria and Egypt for their treatment of prisoners. The report failed to address the fact that, to circumvent torture rules, the White House has quietly been shipping suspects off to these countries known for torture. The practice, known as "extraordinary rendition," has become a "principle weapon in the CIA's arsenal" against prisoners. In one highly publicized example, the administration, lacking enough evidence to detain Canadian citizen Maher Arar, shipped him off to Syria. There, he claims he suffered 10 months of prolonged torture. In another case, the U.S. shipped Australian citizen Mamdouh Habib off to Egypt for "questioning." There he claims to have undergone six months of torture. When he finally arrived at Guantanamo Bay, he was missing most of his fingernails. Both men were eventually found to have no connection to terrorists and were released.

IRAQ HAS A LOT TO LEARN: The report cites serious abuses in the U.S.-supported, brand-new government in Iraq. According to the State Department, last year Iraqi police officers and government officials committed serious human rights violations, including rape, murder, extortion, torture and illegal detentions. (Iraq is also currently having problems with freedom of the press: today's Washington Post reports that after a devastating suicide bomb killed hundreds in Iraq yesterday, Iraqi police prohibited journalists from talking to any of the wounded at the hospital and "beat several cameramen" who tried to enter.

RUSSIA'S RECORD ON RIGHTS: Russia under President Vladimir Putin has been sliding closer and closer to a totalitarian state. President Bush had a key opportunity in his meeting with the Russian president last week to hold Putin accountable for his attacks on democracy. He blew it. Putin remained silent on his transgressions, and instead of pushing him to recommit to democratic principles in Russia, Bush merely said the world should trust the Russian leader. The new State Department report shows what happens when you just trust Putin to do the right thing. Specifically, it criticized Putin's government, saying "government pressure continued to weaken freedom of expression in the media, that the killing of civilians in Chechnya continued unabated, and that there are credible reports that law enforcement personnel engaged in torture, violence, and other brutal or humiliating treatment, often with impunity." It also faulted Russia for "its restriction of news media, and its allowing of political pressure to taint the judiciary."

KEY ALLIES AT FAULT: Many other countries the U.S. counts among its friends were guilty of crimes against human rights, according to the State Department's report. The White House has long turned a blind eye to abuses in Saudi Arabia; the report charges abuses in the country today "far exceed the advances." Saudi Arabia is charged with "a lack of legal rights, violence against women and children and discrimination against religious minorities" as well as "torture," including sleep deprivation and whippings. Libya, which recently enjoyed resumed diplomatic contact with the U.S., is charged with chaining prisoners to walls while threatening to attack them with dogs. (According to the Washington Post, the Libyan "menu of torture" also included electric shock and finger-breaking.)

SOCIAL SECURITY
Systematic Scare Campaign

The Bush administration has launched a systematic campaign to scare Americans into dismantling Social Security. A new report by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) – based on a review of over 4,000 pages of documents – reveals "the Social Security Administration (SSA) has modified its communications strategy to undermine public confidence in Social Security." For example, in 2000, a booklet called "The Future of Social Security" began: "Will Social Security be there for you? Absolutely." Now, that language has been eliminated and the booklet begins: "Social Security must change to meet future challenges." A statement sent annually to the public no longer urges workers to think of Social Security as a "foundation on which to build your financial future." Instead, it reminds Americans that "Congress has made changes to the law in the past and can do so at any time." The report's findings call into question the independence of the SSA, which is supposed to be insulated from politics.

UNDERMINING BIPARTISAN EFFORTS TO CREATE AN INDEPENDENT AGENCY: In 1994, after a unanimous vote in both houses of Congress, President Clinton made the SSA an independent entity – separate from any federal department – precisely to avoid the kind of political manipulation taking place today. On 8/11/94 on the House floor, former Congressman Jim Bunning (R-KY) said, "I rise enthusiastically in support of (the independence legislation) and urge my colleagues to join me in once again approving this monumental piece of legislation to restore independence to the Social Security Administration." Former Sen. Bob Packwood (R-OR) said, "An independent Social Security Administration is the first step in restoring public confidence in America's social security system." He was right. That's why the Bush administration realized the first step to undermining public confidence in Social Security was ignoring the law and politicizing the agency.

MISLEADING THE PUBLIC ABOUT MISLEADING THE PUBLIC: The report documents that as the "estimates of Social Security's long-term solvency have improved over the last four years, the Social Security Administration rhetoric has moved in the opposite direction." For example, in 2001, when the Social Security trustees predicted the trust fund would be sufficient to provide full benefits until 2038, the SSA released this straightforward press release: "The Social Security Board of Trustees today released its annual report on the long-term financial health of the Social Security Trust Funds. The 2001 Trustees Report projects that the Social Security program will remain solvent until 2038 — one year later than reported last year." In 2003, the trustees estimated the trust fund would be able to pay full benefits for four years longer, until 2042. Here's how the SSA billed it: "The Social Security Board of Trustees today declared that the Social Security program is not sustainable over the long term. The 2003 Social Security Trustees report does extend the projected solvency of the funds by one year [as compared to 2002]." Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, Jo Anne Barnhart, who President Bush appointed to head the SSA, claims "the messages we use to inform the public have been consistent through the last decade."

TAXPAYERS PONY UP FOR ANOTHER WAR: The Social Security Administration isn't the only government agency misusing taxpayer dollars to advance the administration's Social Security privatization scheme. The Treasury Department has "announced the formation of a Social Security 'war room' and the hiring of three full-time employees to help coordinate and refine the administration's message on the issue." The war room will "track lawmakers' remarks to their local news outlets, to help the White House detect signs of Republican concern or Democratic compromise." (Note to administration: this information is available for free on talkingpointsmemo.com.)

christymarx.com | site map | Christy Marx: Writing Credits