Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Corruption in Kenya post-Moi

The scandal in Kenya expanded more today , with a report by Transparency International , an anti-corruption NGO detailing the expanding corruption problems of the government. The report (pdf) focuses on the purchase of luxury vehicles for government employees (e.g., Mercedes and Land Cruisers) instead of more cost-effective and appropriate vehicles purchased by a government vehicle pool. Besides the waste of government resources, the report notes that Perceptions do matter. Conspicuous consumption builds resentment in society and ridicules efforts aimed at securing external financial support. Because the line between such expenditure and corruption is also very thin, senior government officials continue to be perceived as corrupt. The perception of official corruption caused by conspicuous consumption may also hinder unrelated efforts at fighting corruption if the populace believes the government is too corrupt. Finally, the amount spent on the luxury vehicles is enough to put 25,000 children through 8 years of school or to provide anti-retroviral treatment for 147,000 peaople (of the 259,000 needing the treatment but not receiving it) for one year. Corruption is one of the most serious obstacles to poverty-reducing policies in developing countries.

Oil Price Rise Imminent?

As the Financial Times reports in today's print edition, OPEC has resisted Iranian pressure to reduce the supply of oil. In the same article, it is noted that:<blockquote>Iran is OPEC's second largest oil producer, pumping 4m barrels a day and exporting 2.5m. A halt in its output would send international oil prices to more than $100, analysts predict. (italics added)</blockquote>While the Financial Times reports today that Iran has come out and said that they will not stop oil exports and rejected any link between "Iranian oil exports and questions over its nuclear programme". However, with other instability, such as in Nigeria and elsewhere in the Middle East, even a credible promise will leave oil prices high (due to a risk premium). In addition, the credibility of the Iranian government to make a promise to keep the oil flowing may be suspect and, in addition to increasing the risk premium, could be reneged on. This would lead to the predicted spike in oil prices, which would almost certainly halt economic growth in oil-importing countries.

Advice for Fellow Liberals

Some good advice (quoted at length from DailyKos : What is generally considered the most important galvanizing event for the modern conservative movement? The crushing defeat, in 1964, of Barry Goldwater.Did the conservatives give up after what should have been a humiliating defeat in 1964? Of course not. They never gave up, not once. They organized in just about every precinct in America. They put out legions of volunteers. They created organizations, and think tanks, and press operations, and trained and developed and nurtured young political operatives. They raised money. And throughout it all, they pursued a two-pronged approach: 1. They did whatever they could to create Republican majorities. 2. They did whatever they could to take control of the Republican party, and where possible nominate and elect conservative fellow travelers to office.Note that never have they divorced one from the other. They almost all always fight to do what they can to install and maintain majorities. Then, over time, they became a majority of the majority party. In the overall body politic, the movement conservatives are a minority, and certainly not even a plurality when you divide up the electorate into regional and ideological segments. But they control the Republican party, and in the persons of George W. Bush and Karl Rove, they have tools and fellow conspirators.
[...]

There are only two games in town, folks, the Republicans and the Democrats. Regardless of what some may wish, we're in a winner-take-all system, so your choices are the following:

1. Actively help change the Democratic party into the party you want.
2. Actively help change the Republican party into the party you want.
3. Do nothing within the parties, and be a passive consumer of what the parties present to you.

There really aren't any other choices. It's up to you. But if you're really a fighter, you'll recognize where the fight is. You'll recognize that it's not going to be won overnight; it took the conservatives almost 40 years to fully take over the Repub party and instill conservative ideologues in control of our national government.

Monday, January 30, 2006

A Ban on Sex in Kansas

The NY Times reports that a trial has begun to determine whether a law banning all sexual activity by people under age 16 is constitutional. The Kansas attorney general Phill Kline says that "Illegal sexual activity by minors can lead to S.T.D.'s, unwanted pregnancies, abortion, depression, mental illness...To pretend otherwise is foolish." This is ludicrous. Banning all sexual behavior under the age of 16 will increase STDs, unwanted pregnancy and abortion and will stifle efforts to encourage safe sex, which is best taught at an early age around the time of puberty. As Dr. Robert Blum, a professor at Johns Hopkins University said it is "problematic" if children 12 and under are having sex, but "That's distinctly different than a 14-, 15-, or 16-year old in a romantic relationship". One question that arose in my mind is whether the law would ban masturbation, which, if the case, would create a huge class of sexually retarded children and wouldn't do a damn thing about reducing STDs and unwanted pregnancies (and abortions) because, last I checked, masturbation cannot spread STDs and cannot impregnate women. Although, since the Kansas AG is probably a fundamentalist Christian with a literal interpretation of the Bible, he might dispute my claim with the evidence being Mary (who although remained a virgin, did not become impregnated through masturbation, at least not according to what I learned).

Bush's ratings still pathetic

According to an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll , Bush's approval rating is still 39 percent (with 54 percent disapproval) and two-thirds of Americans polled say they want to bring the troops home. The American people are sick of Bush and sick of the Bush/Congressional Republican corruption.

Jack Abramoff Photos


The first pictures are out. The Department of Interior today released a picture of Gale Norton with Abramoff and his clients. The release was precipitated by a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. Hopefully this will lead to the release of more photos of Administration officials with Abramoff.

Portugese Desert

Reuters reports that parts of southern Portugal could become desert if global warming continues in the next few decades. Global warming is a serious problem and the U.S. should rejoin Kyoto. Even if the U.S. doesn't like the treaty, rejoining talks would allow us to start complying with the standards and provide us a seat at the table for negotiating the post-2012 protocol. Otherwise, there won't be a credible enough target for carbon emission reduction.

Protest ban

5 midwestern states are proposing bans on protests at funerals in response to the hateful Phelps-associated groups. While there are some free speech concerns that need to be put in the law, the bans are appropriate with the level of hate speech coming out of those who participate. While hate speech is a 1st amendment protected activity, what the protesters say approaches a level of inciting violence. For example, the grand-daughter of Fred Phelps, Shirley Phelps-Roper is quoted as saying the following:
These aren't private funerals; these are patriotic pep rallies. Our goal is to call America an abomination, to help the nation connect the dots. You turn this nation over to the fags and our soldiers come home in body bags.

This quote is discussing the protests of soldiers who died in Iraq (heterosexual soldiers, nonetheless). The protesters claim that because of "God's displeasure" that disasters like the war in Iraq, hurricane Katrina and the Sago mining disaster. While Republicans are quick to say anti-war protesters "hate America", there are many fewer who condemn the Phelps church protesters. While their speech and assembly are protected, their rhetoric hints that they want more than right to hate speech, that they want to incite acts of violence.

More revelations of FEMA failures

The Washington Post reports that the Interior Department offered many resources that were in dire need in the days after hurricane Katrina made landfall. However, because of the failure of FEMA, these resources were not used for more than a month after the hurricane struck. The resources included 400 law enforcement personnel that could have helped to stabilize the region and aid in search-and-rescue of people stranded by the hurricane and flooding. It it another reminder of what a "heckofajob" Brownie, FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security were doing. If they couldn't make use of resources from elsewhere within the government for a disaster that was predicted and anticipated, how again are they going to adequately respond if there is another terrorist attack on the U.S.? Clearly, the system established after 9/11 has failed, yet Michael Chertoff is still the head of the DHS and there hasn't been much movement on rebuilding FEMA to what it was when Clinton left office.

Right-wing medicine

The Washington Post reports on a new trend of states allowing healthcare workers the right to refuse to do certain approved medical procedures if it goes agains their beliefs. This ranges from pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions to refusing care to gays and lesbians. This has gone too far. There is a legitimate concern that healthcare workers might have to do things or treat people they find objectionable, but it should not be protected even to the extent that it harms people. For example, the morning-after pill has to be taken quickly and time is of the essence. Fundamentalist zealots should not control the prescriptions and be protected. If they refuse to fill the prescription, they should be fired and after a few offences, banned from being a pharmacist. If aspects of their jobs violate their beliefs, there is a simple right they should be guaranteed, the right to quit. Individual morality can determine individual medical decisions, but the right of fundamentalists to push those beliefs on others through their role as doctors and pharmacists should not be guaranteed and those who act otherwise should face the music.

Chafee says 'no' to Alito, 'no' to filibuster

While it is admirable that at least (although probably only one) Republican senator has bucked the party line, lockstep support of Alito, without regard to his extremist views, there still is not enough courage even within the Democratic Party to block the nominee. There is no valid interpretation of the Consitution that makes the Senate a rubber-stamp of the President's nominees. Indeed, many of the same Republicans that attack Democrats for even thinking about a 'no' vote, let alone supporting a filibuster, were quick to attack and try to delay approval of President Clinton's nominees. They were quite willing and even eager to block the nominees on even more political grounds than they claim were the reason for opposition to Alito. They assume people are lazy and stupid. How else could Sen. Brownback (R-KS), a member of the judiciary committee, claim on Hardball that the theory of a unitary executive just means that there can only be one president at a time without any challenge to his statement. Alito supports the 'unitary executive', a theory that the executive branch can operate largely free from any checks by the other two branches. It is a legal theory that the Bush administration has used to legitimize torture, domestic spying, war on false pretenses, and probably a few other things we don't even know about yet. That is why the 'unitary executive' theory is so dangerous and why all the stops should be pulled to block Alito.

Friday, January 27, 2006

I hate Ann Coulter

Well apparently comments the Republicans would label as treasonous if a Democrat said them are ok if Ann Coulter says them. Her words speak for her:
"We need somebody to put rat poisoning in Justice Stevens' creme brulee," Coulter said. "That's just a joke, for you in the media."
Hmmm, hypocrisy anyone?

Thursday, January 26, 2006

Stress relief, or how I learned to stop worrying and love the sex

The AP reports (via Wonkette) that sex can reduce stress levels in stressful situations like public speaking. The study, published in Biological Psychology, found that the effects can last for up to a week and "Penetrative sex was far more effective in this regard [reducing stress and blood pressure] than masturbation or oral sex". I wonder if it works for job interviews...

Eminent Domain policy

Today one of the larger banks in the South-east U.S., BB&T, announced that it would no longer provide loans to developers who have obtained the land by eminent domain. The policy is in response to a 5-4 Supreme Court decision in New London, CT, where the court found that eminent domain could be used to give property to developers based on the anticipated higher tax revenues. I think this reasoning is excessively favorable to developers at the expense of the constitutional protection provided by limits to the government's power of eminent domain. And now, as far as I (or the Financial Times) can find, BB&T becomes the first financial institution to create a policy targeted against excessive use of eminent domain for private gain. From the press release:
“The idea that a citizen’s property can be taken by the government solely for private use is extremely misguided, in fact it’s just plain wrong,” said BB&T Chairman and Chief Executive Officer John Allison.

“One of the most basic rights of every citizen is to keep what they own. As an institution dedicated to helping our clients achieve economic success and financial security, we won’t help any entity or company that would undermine that mission and threaten the hard-earned American dream of property ownership.”

Hopefully this will not be the last company to make this controversy into policy.

U.S. subpoena of Google searches

The NY Times notes that there is a non-privacy-related concern in the subpoena that Google is fighting, one which had briefly occured to me, but with some exposition seems quite probable. Google is concerned that the subpoena would harm Google by compromising their trade secrets. This argument, not the privacy one, is why the ACLU has come out on Google's side. While much of the talk has been of violation of privacy, the subpoena seems to be more objectionable on a "crown-jewel trade secrets" argument. The privacy issue is still valid in other instances. The Times reports:
As recently demonstrated by disclosures of surveillance by the National Security Agency and secret inquiries under the USA Patriot Act, the government is aggressively collecting information to combat terror. And even in ordinary criminal prosecutions and in civil lawsuits, Internet companies including Google routinely turn over authentically private information in response to focused warrants and subpoenas from prosecutors and litigants.

The two issues should be separated, but each has merit.

Wednesday, January 25, 2006

Abramoff vs. Bush: The Photos

On last night's Hardball, Michael Isikoff of Newsweek confirmed speculation that the photos seen by Time Magazine and The Washingtonian of Bush and Jack Abramoff were provided by Abramoff. He says:
The other interesting aspect of this is, while the White House hasn’t put these out, Jack Abramoff has clearly shown them to people. I don’t know anything about Time sources, but I do know that he showed them to Washingtonian magazine, which suggests he may be playing a little bit of a game here.

It appears that Jack Abramoff may be a bit put off by the distancing the White House has attempted. What better way to get back than show the level of relationship between himself and the President. It has been reported that Bush met with Abramoff's clients and was comfortable enough with Abramoff to know his children's name. The Washington Post has an editorial today on Abramoff. It notes that Abramoff's connections are more than just Hanukah parties and a photo:
In addition to attending a few White House Hanukkah parties and other events at which he had his picture snapped with the president, Mr. Abramoff had, according to the White House, "a few staff-level meetings" with White House aides.

Until the White House stops stonewalling, the suspicion that they were partners in crime with Jack Abramoff continues to have relevance.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006

Congo (Brazzaville) to head AU

The African Union (AU) has agreed that instead of installing Sudan as the president of its organization, the Republic of Congo (Brazzaville), not to be confused with the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The Republic of Congo (RoC), while not suffering from the violence plaguing the DRC still has issues with human rights groups. According to the CIA factbook, the country has, until a 2003 cease-fire, been plagued with civil war. Furthermore, as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have noted, the country has a dubious (at best) record on human rights. It has been obvious that the AU cannot let Sudan (the host of the AU conference in Khartoum) become the leader of the AU, it was only today that Sudan bowed to the pressure and declined to become the head of the AU. Until now, it was common practice that the host of the AU summit led the group. To interject a little commentary, I have respect for how the AU has handled the situation in Darfur with the limited forces available. Without the AU, there would be no forces in Darfur providing security. While they have been serving, the U.S. has (appropriately) dropped the G-word (genocide), but done nothing. We say we never want to see another Holocaust or Rwanda, but it is happening in Darfur (and threatens to happen again in Kosovo). [end of commentary]. Back to the commentary of the accession of the RoC to the AU head: the Red Cross was forced, in the last few days (on January 18, 2006), to quit their activitiesin the Pool Region of the RoC. As reported:
e ICRC had been assisting medical centres with services for around 60,000 people in Pool. It has also been providing clean water to many local communities.

Pool is a stronghold of former rebels known as the Ninjas, many of whom are yet to be disarmed and demobilized, although the RoC's civil war ended in 2003. (italics added)

The ninjas, named after the Japanese warriors, are the rebel group in the southeastern Republic of Congo near the capital who fought against government forces in the civil war. While it is hard to find an admirable leader in human rights in Africa (no disrespect meant), there are better than the Republic of Conga (Brazzaville) to fill in Sudan’s spot. My suggestions would be South Africa, Uganda or Liberia. All have their problems, but South Africa has a solid post-apartheid government that is democratic (with its warts). Uganda has been a leader advocating pro-condom AIDS prevention plans, despite the Bush Administration’s abstinence-only agenda. Liberia has a newly elected democratic government headed by an economist. While I have a predilection towards economists (being one myself), Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, as an intelligent woman, can provide the country with a positive future if she manages the post-conflict well.

Monday, January 23, 2006

Ford joins GM in cutting domestic production

There are two main reasons why Ford and GM are not able to maintain production and therefore have launched large scale cuts in employment and production for the U.S. market: intransigence in the face of higher oil prices and high health care costs. While there may be other reasons, those are the two main reasons. On the first reason, both Ford and GM have continued to produce behemoths that get poor gas mileage, despite much higher gas prices. It is almost like they are still living in the 1990s with oil prices around $15 per gallon. In contrast, oil prices are now approaching $70 per gallon. Part of this is a failure of federal policy that could force higher fuel efficiency. A similar thing happened in the 1970s and the 1980s. The other factor is huge increases in the cost of health insurance. This would be mitigated with a national health insurance. American companies including GM have commented on how much they save in markets like Canada where there is national health insuraance. Furthermore, these systems are much more cost efficient than the American system of private health insurance, where administrative costs are many times higher than a publicly run system.

The Spying Rock

In another incident in which Putin's autocratic side has been showing, the Kremlin (via Rossiya, the state owned television station) accused the British of spying on Russia using a fake rock hidden in a park. As the Times (UK) reports:
British sources said that the Russian action appeared to be less an attempt to humiliate an old Cold War adversary than an attempt by the Kremlin to justify President Putin’s controversial decision last week to sign a new law imposing draconian restrictions on the activities of non-governmental organisations (NGOs).

So much for democracy in Russia. 15 years after the decline of the Soviet Union and Russia under Putin seems headed more for autocracy than democracy. It is a shame, but one that European and American leaders in the past 5 years share some responsibility for.

Supporting the troops?

The Washington Post reports today that Halliburton provided American troops with contaminated water and, despite knowing about it, did not provide any warning. Then again, why should they care, their former CEO is Vice President Dick Cheney. They have already overcharged the government for gasoline without any punishment. Who knows what else they are covering up. Maybe using beef infected with BSE? Nothing is too far outside of the realm of possibility for a company that will not face accountability as long as the Republicans are in power. And while the Democrats have launched an investigation into the allegations, they do not have support from Republicans and therefore will not have subpoena power. The hearings, while important to raise public awareness, will do nothing to provide checks on Halliburton's activities.

Republican Investigation of Corruption?

The Financial Times reports today that there has been a lot of internal division over Paul Wolfowitz's choice of Suzanne Rich Folsom to head the Department of Institutional Integrity. The DII was created in 2001 amid suspicion that there was corruption within the Bank. However, by appointing Ms. Rich Folsom, who has strong ties to the Republican Party, the veil of impartiality and separation between the World Bank President and the DII is degraded. Maybe the architect of the disastrous war on Iraq wasn't the best person to appoint to the World Bank. Or maybe the lack of impartiality within the DII was the point. The article ends with:
Mr. Wolfowitz's appointment Last year was greeted with apprehension by some long-time staff. Many Republicans believe the bank is plagued by corruption. Ms. Rich Folsom was hired by [former World Bank president] Mr. Wolfensohn with the task of improving the bank's relations with Congressional Republicans.

Thursday, January 19, 2006

Rendition in the news again

As the New York Times reports, a memo leaked in the U.K. suggests the U.K. government allowed CIA flights with suspectes being rendered to use their airports and airspace. This will hopefully lead to an investigation on whether the Blair government broke the law by allowing this. The memo is described as:
The British government may have permitted the use of its airspace and airports for American rendition flights more frequently than it initially acknowledged, according to a leaked document published today in a British weekly magazine.

The memo - said to have been written around last Dec. 7 by a Foreign Office official, Irfan Siddiq, to Grace Cassy, an official in the office of Prime Minister Tony Blair - seemed likely to deepen concerns across Europe about the extent of clandestine flights operated by the Central Intelligence Agency.

Immigration & Social Security: A Brain Fart

I think it is time for Democrats to actually suggest that immigration is a good thing. If you look at protecting the federal programs that protect the poor and workers, a more liberalized immigration policy would do this country quite well. The United States is getting older and the demographic challenges of the next 30 years are going to give the Republicans more and more support for cutting off Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and other programs on the "we have to cut the deficit" line (even though much of the deficits were created by huge tax cuts primarily helping those at the top of the income distribution and have cut severely into federal tax revenues. Increasing the legalized mobility of labor into the country will help the U.S. manage the demographic challenge by supplementing the work force with younger, tax-paying workers. It will also help stem the tide of illegal workers (many of whom would participate in an expanded legal immigration program). Many of these workers will not spend the rest of their life in the U.S. and therefore will contribute far more in taxes than they take out, even accounting for their higher fertility rates. This, along with sensible retractions of parts of the tax cuts of the past 5 years, will reduce the deficit, put federal programs on a more secure long-term fiscal footing and will enhance the strength of the constituencies who support them. This, along with a move towards a more cost-effective health insurance system that is publicly-financed, will provide the support and money to continue and expand important federal programs that help workers, the disabled and those living on low incomes.

How the hell are we safer now?

Well, all the speculation that bin Laden is dead is wrong I guess. Over 4 years later, with restrictions on Americans and those who wish to come to the U.S., illegal, warrantless spying on Americans and we still haven't captured or killed the leader of the group that attacked us. I understand that he is not the entire group, but getting him would be a good sign of determination and progress. Of course, that would deprive Bush of a political tool to trot out every so often to frighten people into submission. Bush is a national security failure. Only by luck and the work of analysts, etc. have we avoided a domestic terrorist attack. We haven't really done much other than create more bureaucracy (Department of Homeland Security) and roll back constitutional protections of individuals from their government.

Protecting End-of-life Decisions

The NY Times has a thoughtful editorial on the ruling by the Supreme Court yesterday that "rejected Mr. Ashcroft's attempt to impose his religiously conservative ideology on a state whose voters had decided differently." The editorial also raises the question of what Chief Justice Roberts meant when he "assured senators that he believed people had 'the right to be let alone,'" and still supported the government's intrusive position on one of the most sensitive decisions one can make.

The Times also went a step further arguing against any Congressional effort to restrict Oregon's law. The law in Oregon sets stringent requirements for assisted suicide and when these requirements are met, there should be no attempt by the government to rule over end-of-life decisions, as the meddling in the Schiavo case should have demonstrated. The Times sums up:
But our own sense is that Oregon has acted with exquisite care by requiring that two doctors agree that a patient is likely to die within six months, and is well informed and acting voluntarily, before lethal drugs can be prescribed. Congress would be wise not to meddle in a sensitive issue that Oregon has clearly studied far more closely.

Agreed.

Wednesday, January 18, 2006

Congressional Research Service Report on NSA Wiretapping: Follow up

There is little new from this article where the Congressional Research Service issued a report questioning the legality of the NSA warrantless wiretapping program. However, in light of comments made by Scott McClellan yesterday (Jan. 17, 2006), the veracity of his evasive responses on the legality of the NSA program comes into question. From the transcript on WhiteHouse.gov:
MR. McCLELLAN: But I would point out -- well, I would point out that there are a number of congressional briefings that took place over the last few years, more than a dozen. And Congresswoman Harman said that this is an essential program; this is essential to our national security, and that its disclosure has been harmful.

However, from the NY Times article:
In an interview on Wednesday, Ms. Harman, of California, said she had been invited to another briefing on the program at the White House on Friday and had urged senior administration officials to open the session to the full committees.

She declined to name the officials, but a Congressional staff member said they were Andrew H. Card Jr., the White House chief of staff; and David S. Addington, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff. Mr. Cheney's office oversees the briefings on the surveillance program.

Of the Congressional Research Service analysis, Ms. Harman said, "It's a solid piece of work, and it confirms a view I've held for a long time."

That doesn't sound like exactly full support and defense of the program. It also sounds like McClellan caught in a lie.

Human Rights Watch Scares Scotty McClellan

The New York Times today summarizes a report by Human Rights Watch that criticizes the U.S. for hurting efforts to end torture and violation of human rights. By systematic policy, the report accuses, the United States creates conditions in which human rights are violated and the role of the U.S. as the country of best human rights practices falls into the past. The report is apparently quite threatening to Scott McClellan, who had to resort to lashing out at Human Rights Watch instead of addressing its concerns. From the article:
The charges drew an unusually sharp rebuff from the White House. Scott McClellan, the White House spokesman, said he was "rejecting the description of the United States."

"When a group like this makes some of these assertions, it diminishes the effectiveness of that organization," he said. "It appears to be based more on a political agenda than facts."

When you say something that causes McClellan to lash out, you know that (a) you have hit a sore spot with the administration, and (b) there is likely to be some truth to what you have said.

Using the victims

The Washington Post reports today that Bush met with victims of Saddam's rule. While it is a profound experience to talk to those who have been victimized by totalitarian governments, it reeks of an attempt at political gain on the backs of the victims. With support for the war in Iraq at a low point, Bush is trotting out the victims of Saddam to give himself political cover for manipulating intelligence to get us into the war. We did not go to remove a "tyrant" as Bush likes to call Saddam, for if we had, we would have also had to go into Sudan, Libya, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and the list goes on. We went to Iraq on the claims of the administration that Saddam had WMD. That was the reason and any attempts to shift the explanation to anything else is dishonest. Therefore, it seems particularly sick for Bush to use the victims of Saddam as political cover to bolster his reputation. They have been through enough from one leader. They don't need to be exploited by another.

Tuesday, January 17, 2006

Go Gore, Go!

Today Al Gore gave a really good speech on the threat the Bush Administration, particularly through the use of warrantless NSA wiretaps, poses to the Constitution. There are 6 minutes of video clips here and the full transcript here. Well worth reading and seeing the video clips, especially if you have not seen him speak since 2000.

Hilary grows a set (for the day)

The quotes from the Washington Post article say it all. But no doubt, she'll be back to banning flag buring when she wakes up tomorrow. From the article:
The House "has been run like a plantation, and you know what I'm talking about," said Clinton, D-N.Y. "It has been run in a way so that nobody with a contrary view has had a chance to present legislation, to make an argument, to be heard."

"We have a culture of corruption, we have cronyism, we have incompetence," she said. "I predict to you that this administration will go down in history as one of the worst that has ever governed our country.

Iran & China

As the Washington Post reports, China and Russia appear to be lowering their objections to referring Iran to the Security Council, but I don't think that means they (and China in particular) will support sanctions against Iran. Russia has built and is providing fuel for nuclear reactors in Iran (at Bushehr), and may be wary of being forced to give up the money it provides. China also will likely oppose sanctions against Iran. According to Reuters, 12 percent of Chinese oil imports (of the 42.9% of its demand that is imported) come from Iran, and since Iran is the 4th largest oil exporter in the world, the effect on oil prices would hurt the Chinese economy (as well as the rest of the oil-importing world). That is not to say that the sanctions may not be necessary, and may help China if it becomes a choice between sanctions and a U.S. invasion of Iran.

Yikes!

Well, if anyone doubted whether Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was sane, there's the answer. He appears also to be suffering from suicidal tendencies. (Picture is from the AP via the Washington Post)

Ashcroft Exorcized

Today the Supreme Court struck down former Attorney General John Ashcroft's challenge to Oregon's physician-assisted suicide law. This is a very good decision as it reasserts individual's rights to end-of-life decisions. The referendum, initially passed in 1994 and then re-affirmed by voters in 1997 (according to Deathwithdignity.org). Ashcroft challenged the law by attempting to have it over-ruled under the Federal Controlled Substances Act. As anticipated by opponents of his nomination, Cheif Justice John Roberts sided with Scalia and in the dissenting arguments,
Scalia backed the government's position that assisting in suicide was not a "legitimate medical purpose." Saying that the court's decision "is perhaps driven by a feeling that the subject of assisted suicide is none of the Federal Government's business," Scalia wrote that "it is easy to sympathize with that position." However, the government has long been able to use its powers "for the purpose of protecting public morality," he said.

Since when was interfering with individual's end-of-life choices (with the input of several doctors, as required by the law) constitute an issue of "public morality". Vague phrases like this leave Scalia a wide opening for him to become what Republicans call an "activist judge", since the determination of what the public morality is is highly subjective and can be invoked to ignore both laws and precedent.

Thursday, January 12, 2006

Murtha: Iraq is in a civil war

Rep. Murtha (D-PA), the representative who called for a full, immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops argues that Iraq is already in a civil war. Furthermore, he points out that our presence there, besides being divisive, essentially just puts our troops in the middle of the civil war. His conclusion, while depressing, is, I think, accurate:
The ethnic and religious strife in Iraq has been going on, not for decades or centuries, but for millennia. These particular explosive hatreds and tensions will be there if our troops leave in six months, six years or six decades. It is time to re-deploy our troops and to re-focus our attention on the real threats posed by global terrorism.

It speaks for itself

A headline from the Washington Post's website that summarizes why Alito should not be confirmed:

Alito Leaves Door Open to Reverse Roe v. Wade

Nominee signals willingness to revisit ruling that legalized abortion; Democrats assail his ties to group that sought to exclude women, minorities.

Plead the Article 31st

It appears that the General in charge of both Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib, Major General Geoffrey Miller, has refused to be interviewed on the use of military dogs in interrogation. In refusing, he has invoked Article 31, the military equivalent of the 5th Amendment, which protects those being interrogated from self incrimination. This is a promising development in understanding how prisoner abuse was transferred between Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib. While the Bush administration blames a few 'bad apples', the similarity of reported techniques, including the use of dogs (to exploit Arab fears of dogs), using other phobias, among other similar techniques, begs the questions of whether there was a standard for detainee abuse. The Bybee Memos, commissioned by then-White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales, significantly restricted the definition of torture and allowed techniques that would have been banned under conventional definitions of torture and inhumane treatment, including under the Geneva Conventions. It may go all the way to the top. Follow the torture.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006

Dollar Devaluation (pdf)

In the Financial Times this morning, Martin Feldstein, a Harvard economist, lays out the reasons for a steep devaluation of the U.S. dollar in order to correct all or part of the trade deficit. This, in addition to hints that China may buy less U.S. debt and George Soros forcasts the possibility of a recession in 2007, partly in response to trade deficits and currency devaluation (which, in addition, could spread the recession further afield than just the U.S.). It is a pessimistic, but realistic view that the continuing high twin deficits (feels like we're back in the 1980s), the budget and trade/current account deficis, are unsustainable. Combined with an inevitable correction in the housing market, which may or may not be smooth, predisposes the U.S. to an economic jolt, if not a full-blown recession. Sooner or later foreigners buying our debts will become worried about a sharp depreciation of the U.S. dollar, which will hurt the relative returns on the U.S. debt they hold, prompting them to get rid of U.S. dollar-denominated debt, which could even hasten a crisis. We are saved now by the reputation of the U.S., but sooner or later, unless the policies are changed, the economics will spring forth and it will be messy.

Dollar Crisis in the works?

The signs are there. There is a higher probability of a dollar currency crisis in the next few years than there was before. Increasingly, reports coming out of the Chinese government point to a reappraisal of investing foreign reserves in dollar assets. With the Chinese reserves approaching $1 trillion, a new nervousnous has arisen that points to a shift in investments away from dollars. This trend has predecessors. With Saddam's government trying to get a lift in sanctions and hinting it might sell its oil using euros instead of dollars, the country was invaded. When South Korea and Japan (the largest holder of dollar denominated, U.S government debt) announced plans for "diversification", the dollar plunged and the countries were forced to recant. However, with China, not an ally of the U.S. reliant on the U.S. military for security, promising (at least unofficially) a re-evaluation of its investments (at least its future investments) in dollar-deminated debt, the USD could be in for rocky times ahead. It makes sense in terms of our fiscal and trade balance position, but when will politicians in Washington realize the severity? With a Republican controlled Congress focused on the Abramoff scandal, it will probably be too late.

Sick Sense of Humor

Abramoff's shell fund was called the American International Center. Does that sound like "The Human Fund" to you? Thank to Costanza for the insight.

K Street Collapse

The Washington Post reports today that a lobbying firm close to Tom DeLay has announced that it is closing today. The lobbying firm has close ties to both DeLay and Abramoff, representing many of the latter's clients including the Choctaw Tribe. It also employed his staffer Tony Rudy, mentioned in Abramoff's plea bargain as "Staffer A". Furthermore, both DeLay's wife Christine and the wife of Rep. Doolittle (R-CA). The folding of this lobbying firm spells trouble for the "K-Street Project", where DeLay tried to recreate K Street as a strictly Republican lobbying empire. I wouldn't be surprised if other lobbying firms decide it is advantageous to reconstruct themselves under other names in order to avoid the negative publicity by the Abramoff scandals.

Monday, January 09, 2006

James Risen on Hardball

Norah O'Donnell filling in for Chris Matthews on Hardball today talked with James Risen, one of the authors of the NSA wiretapping article in the NY Times asked whether journalists have been spied upon. This is another question about this topic asked (Andrea Mitchell, in an unaired, temporarily edited out segment asked James Risen about whether Christiane Amanpour was wiretapped by the NSA, see AmericaBLOG's entry on this)

Prelude to Senate Investigation

In the opening to the confirmation hearings of Samuel Alito, Arlen Specter (R-PA) suggested that he is still concerned that the NSA wiretapping without warrants exceeded the authority of the Executive Branch and the powers authorized by the Congress. Specter said:
This hearing comes at a time of great national concern about the balance between civil rights and the president's national security authority. The president's constitutional powers as commander in chief to conduct electronic surveillance appear to conflict with what Congress has said in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

This conflict involves very major considerations raised by Justice Jackson's historic concurrence in the Youngstown Steel seizure cases, where Justice Jackson wrote, quote, "When the president acts pursuant to an express or implied authorization of Congress, his authority is at its maximum for it includes all that he possesses in his own right and all that Congress can delegate. When the president acts in absence of a congressional grant of authority, he can rely only upon his own independent powers. When the president takes measures incompatible with the express or implied will of Congress, his power is at its lowest ebb."

And as Justice Jackson noted, quote, "What is at stake is the equilibrium established in our constitutional system."

Specter seems willing to break with the apologist wing of his party, who desire continued power so long that they are willing to go along with the degradation of the separation of powers. Hopefully, the hearings Sen. Specter promised when the NSA's illegal surveillance (authorized repeatedly by Bush) will go ahead after the Alito hearings and he will not bow to the apologist wing of the Republican Party who seem to favor a rubber-stamp Congress.

No Shame, No Change

A Washington Post article today hints that Hastert might also lose his leadership position in the fall out from the Abramoff scandal. However, what the article also points out is how reluctant the Republican party is to admitting that it corrupt. With the minority whip position being fought over by Reps. Blunt (R-MO) and Boehner (R-OH), both Abramoff- and DeLay-connected legislators, no real change is being made. They are just changing the identity, not the corrupt-ness, of the leadership. The only reason why the Democrats might not retake the House if not the Senate too is their own ineptitude in delineating the Abramoff scandal as a corruption scandal instead of a lobbyist scandal. They try, but with little success. They need to connect the dots and do better than the "culture of corruption" nonsense. The Republicans are crooks. While it poses a threat to all incumbents, getting rid of the money in politics will help Democrats and Congress as a whole.

Sunday, January 08, 2006

NSA Wiretapping continued

The Washington Post reports that the Congressional Research Service has found little support for Bush's claims in support of the NSA wiretapping program. It found that the program of wiretapping without a warrant is most likely illegal. In addition, it found little support for Bush's claims that the 2001 authorization of the use of force authorized the NSA wiretapping. A good start before the Senate hearings promised by Arlen Specter.

DeLay and Bush

The Washington Post and he have interesting stories on Tom DeLay. One details the chain of ethical mishaps of DeLay while the other describes the tense relationship between Bush and DeLay. However much Bush hoped his relationship with DeLay (and by association Abramoff) was one of convenience, he is still going to be wrapped up in the scandal and will feel direct and indirect consequences.

Thursday, January 05, 2006

Conyer's Request for Censure

This is a link to Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) request for censure of Bush & Cheney and the opening of a Select Committee with subpoena power to investigate possible impeachable offences by the Bush Administration.

Harman Speaks

Over at Huffington Post, Rep. Jane Harman speaks about her bill to require that the Intelligence Committee is briefed on the NSA wiretapping. It will be added (hopefully) to the reauthorization of the Patriot Act.

Post-election calm?

Today in Iraq, at least 130 Iraqis and 5 American troops were killed. This, on top of the 50-plus killed yesterday suggests that Bush's claims that Iraq would calm down after the elections were just another stage in his "hope for the best" strategy for getting out of Iraq. With the U.S. troops occupying Iraq and no guarantees that the U.S. is seeking permanent bases in Iraq (see Gary Hart's op-ed in the Financial Times yesterday), the violence will not abate. The U.S. is just getting more and more caught up within an Iraqi civil war, partly caused by faulty planning on the part of the political leaders (of the U.S.) lack of post-war planning. Instead of claiming that we are just about to "turn the corner", Bush should be planning for ways to get the U.S. military out of the way of an insurgency and civil war. Otherwise, we will evolve into a permanent occupying power of a country that wants us out and our soldiers will continue to die. Comparisons of Iraq and Vietnam are useful, but not as much as comparisons with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, which degenerated into a money and manpower drain on the Soviet Union and hastened its collapse.

Congressional oversight ignored

Adding a slightly different wrinkle to the NSA warrentless wiretapping the ranking Democratic member of the House Intelligence Committee, Jane Harman (D-CA) has said that it violates the law because it lacked Congressional oversight. As the AP reports today that in breifings to Congress over the NSA wiretapping program, the Bush Administration broke the law by withholding information needed for Congressional oversight of the program. In addition, there have been complaints from several members of Congress that even though they were told of the program, there was no chance to consult with lawyers or staff on the legality of the program. From this angle, not only has Bush broken the law by authorizing illegal wiretaps, he has also subverted the checks and balances by undermining Congressional oversight. It is just one more illustration of the contempt the Administration holds for the equality of powers. With much comment recently of Supreme Court nominee Alito's view of executive primacy, this should lead to tough questions in his confirmation hearings on just how far Executive Branch powers can extend without review and oversight by the other two branches of government.

Wednesday, January 04, 2006

Held until charged

The case of Jose Padilla is illustrative of the corrosive effect the Bush Administration is having on basic rights guaranteed by the Consitution. With the Supreme Court saying it is o.k. to transfer him to civilian custody, the Court may eventually consider whether Bush has violated the constituion, but has now essentially waived the right to habeas corpus. Padilla was detained in a military brig for 3 years without charges, but now he is being transferred to civilian custody and charged with different crimes then he was held for. This essentially allows the government to, in the name of national security, arrest people and hold them without charge until they find some evidence on which they can make charge and if they cannot, they will continue to illegally hold them.

At the Gates of Europe

Reuters reports today that the Turkish boy thought to have died from pneumonia actually died from the H5N1 strain of the flu, thus making its first human stop on the gates of Europe. Unlike the last invasion of Europe from Turkey, this one is unlikely to be stopped before progressing past Vienna, and should provoke a serious, comprehensive plan for what to do when the Avian flu reaches the EU and the US. And I don't mean nice talk and begging Roche and Gilead for extra vaccines or licensing for additional vaccine production, but real planning.

Russia's Energy Defeat

Today Russia and Ukraine agreed on a solution to the dispute over the cost of gas to Ukraine and the cost of using the pipelines through Ukraine with a ridiculous solution. Essentially, each country gets most of its demands by using an opaque company as an intermediary that pays Russia far higher than it gets from Ukraine for the gas by supplying Ukraine with cheaper Central Asian gas. The deal creates a Soviet-level opacity in the trasactions. While providing Russia with higher price for its gas, Russia comes out with the short stick because of the credibility it lost by cutting off gas supplies to Ukraine (and indirectly to Europe because 80 percent of Russian gas exports to the EU travel through Ukraine). It has also, I believe, increased the future battle over the pipeline project (headed by former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder) that would allow Russia to ship gas to Germany, while bypassing Poland. The Polish government had argued that the pipeline would allow Russia to cut off Poland without affecting the rest of the EU's gas supply. While the argument held little sway when it was made a few months ago, it now has increased relevance. The cutting off of gas through Ukraine has provided Poland with an example of why its fears are credible. A stupid move by Putin.

Tuesday, January 03, 2006

Who Robbed Marion Berry?

This article wouldn't really be funny except for the background information added by the Washington Post. Apparently Del Quentin Wilber agrees with me that Marionberries are not to be eaten (I think they have crack cocaine in them. From the Post's story:
he won election to the council seat, launching his political comeback after serving a six-month prison sentence for drug possession. Barry had been videotaped by the FBI smoking crack cocaine in a downtown hotel room in 1990. Barry was elected to a fourth term as mayor in 1994.

Throw the Bums Out

Over at Huffington Post, Craig Crawford agrees with me that the reason why Democrats are not involved much at all in the bribery scandal is because they have no power. It is true that money runs Washington, and that is a problem for both parties. Crawford notes:
All of Washington could and should lose face in this scandal. Money is the dominant political party in the nation’s capital.

I agree. Even the uncorrupted (directly bribe-taking) members of Congress are tainted by the immense amount of money they need to raise to have a viable campaign for election (and re-election). Furthermore, at the state level, money is funnelled through the parties to candidates who then, once elected, gerrymander the legislative districts to their own advantage, making truly contestable elections nearly impossible. It is an unfortunate, but probably inevitable, trait of the system that most members of Congress are very wealthy because they have to be able to spend a fair portion of the year in Washington. However, that is distinct from the trait that politicians are whores, selling influence (directly through bribes, or indirectly through campaign donations) to the highest bidder. That is the main reform needed, a de-dollarization of politics. Until that happens, the cycle of Republican control, Republican bribery scandal, Democratic control, Democratic bribery scandal will continue unabated and the real public interest will not be served.

Did it really take this long to figure this out?

The Department of Homeland Security has finally begun to focus more on appropriating homeland security grants based on risk rather than politics. In the past the highest per capita grants have gone to states like Wyoming and Montana, states with little risk of a terrorist attack, at the expense of states like New York and California, which have much higher risk of attack; New York has already been attacked. However, the article also points out that:
The cities are vying for a smaller pot this year than in 2005, when Homeland Security distributed $829 million in urban area grants.

This is a strange item to cut. Were the urban area grants distributed in such a poor fashion in the past that less money is needed to protect the most vulnerable cities? Was there really that much money wasted on cities with little or no threat of terrorism? Clearly, the Bush Administration and Congress do not yet have their priorities straight, as we are spending billions upon billions of dollars on a war in Iraq that was purely a war of choice.

Abramoff Flipped

Well, it appears that it is official. Within the next 5 minutes, Jack Abramoff will plead guilty to conspiracy, honest services fraud and tax evasion in a Florida court. The charges he has agreed to plead guilty to are related to the his purchase, with Adam Kidan, of SunCruz, a casino cruise boat business from Gus Boulis, who was later murdered in a gangland style killing, allegedly by people with connections both to the Gambini crime family and Kidan. In exchange for a shorter sentance, Abramoff will testify against members of Congress and their aides in the ongoing Republican bribery scandal. It is likely that the first member of Congress to be hit will be Bob Ney (R-OH), followed by Conrad Burns (R-MT). However, there could be several more Republicans implicated as a part of Abramoff's plea bargain including Tom DeLay (R-TX), who is already charged with money laundering in Texas. Let the Rs fall, and loudly.

Sunday, January 01, 2006

The Wrong Choice: Alito

From reading summaries of his findings, it is pretty clear that Judge Alito is a conservative jurist. However, the Washington Post article comes to several conclusions about Alito that point to a troubled past in enforcing the separation between the judiciary, executive and legislative branches. For instance, the Post reports that:
a closer look finds that he dissents most often in areas where his views are least typical of the average judge: cases in which he has favored religion and largely sided against immigrants and one group of convicted criminals: prisoners facing the death penalty.

The groups that usually push religious arguments (with a few exceptions) are right-wing evangelical Christian groups. In terms of immigrants and death penalty litigants, most are minorities (almost exclusively in the former category and more then a represntative share in the latter category).
The Post article also notes that, in the words of Martin Redish, a constitutional scholar at Northwestern University School of Law, Alito is:
"clearly tough-minded . . . having very little sympathy for those asserting rights against the government."

Under these standards (which I think are essential for Supreme Court Justices), Alito is a bad candidate.