MotherJones.com | MoJoBlog - Social Issues and Political Commentary: May 20, 2007

« May 13, 2007 - May 19, 2007 | Main | May 27, 2007 - June 2, 2007 »

May 25, 2007

Ohio Execution by Lethal Injection Takes 2 Hours

Lethal injection has gotten a lot of well-deserved scrutiny for being kind of cruel and unusual. The three-drug cocktail that is almost universally used in the United States is usually administered by a guard or other non-medical prison official, leading to a high number of mistakes, and the drugs are rumored to cause excruciating pain that often goes undetected. Governors across the country are halting executions in their state until the matter is investigated further. For example, former governor Jeb Bush put a moratorium on executions in Florida after it took a man named Angel Nieves Diaz 34 minutes to die, during which time reporters saw Diaz in obvious pain. Diaz's body had 12 inch burns on its arms after the ordeal.

Yesterday's execution of Christopher Newton in Ohio should add momentum to the fight against lethal injection. Newton took two hours to die. He had to be stuck at least 10 times with needles to insert the shunts where the chemicals are injected. An ACLU lawyer said that Newton had been effectively tortured to death.

This wasn't how it was supposed to be. Lethal injection was invented by an Oklahoma state legislator who wanted to see executions become more humane. But not only is there evidence that death by lethal injection is horribly grotesque, executions have actually become more common because the public has become more comfortable with lethal injection that it ever was with the electric chair (whose head fires -- executions where a prisoner's head would catch fire -- unmistakably illustrated the method's problems). That Oklahoma legislator is now a priest, and he preaches for the end of the death penalty. His remarkable story, and lots of info on the problems with lethal injection, can be found in this 2005 Mother Jones feature, "A Guilty Man."

Prosecutor Firings: Goodling's Testimony, the Gift that Keeps on Giving

Monica Goodling, former Department of Justice (DOJ) White House liaison and Senior Counsel to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales testified before the House Judiciary Committee under the protection of a use immunity this past Wednesday. Former Deputy Attorney General (DAG) Paul McNulty bore the brunt of her freely flowing testimony. Goodling noted, referring to the DAG's testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in February, "The Deputy's public testimony was incomplete or inaccurate in a number of respects." (McNulty could face a criminal investigation.)

But McNulty is not the only one that stands to catch fire from the former DOJ White House liaison's testimony. While admitting that she may have used a political litmus test to screen career positions, as well as political appointees, she pointed a finger at the department's Office of Legal Counsel, claiming that in 2005 Kyle Sampson told her "some years earlier" the office had said civil service rules (rules that bar politics from being weighed as a hiring factor for civil service employees) do not apply to immigration judges as they do to other career positions. The Office of Legal Counsel has fired back claiming the office never held such an opinion.

And, as TPMmuckraker points out today, the appointments of immigration judges during Bush's tenure do look sort of fishy, calling upon a Legal Times article from last year for its information:

Among the 19 immigration judges hired since 2004: Francis Cramer, the former campaign treasurer for New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg; James Nugent, the former vice chairman of the Louisiana Republican Party; and Chris Brisack, a former Republican Party county chairman from Texas who had served on the state library commission under then-Gov. George W. Bush.

But the plot gets a little thicker. Goodling's lawyer, John Dowd, released a response to the Office of Legal Counsel's response. (And round and round we go.) Dowd wrote that Goodling realized there was no official order made by the Office of Legal Counsel and that Acting Assistant Attorney General Daniel Levin had made the suggestion. As TPM notes, this means it "came from the top." Stay tuned.

Obama and McCain -- We've Got Ourselves a Pissing Match, Folks

After Barack Obama opposed the recently-approved war funding bill that replaces timelines for withdrawal with toothless benchmarks, John McCain said the position was "the equivalent of waving a white flag to al Qaeda." Mitt Romney also had harsh words.

Obama responded:

"This country is united in our support for our troops, but we also owe them a plan to relieve them of the burden of policing someone else’s civil war. Governor Romney and Senator McCain clearly believe the course we are on in Iraq is working, but I do not.

"And if there ever was a reflection of that it's the fact that Senator McCain required a flack jacket, ten armored Humvees, two Apache attack helicopters, and 100 soldiers with rifles by his side to stroll through a market in Baghdad just a few weeks ago."

(For background on what Obama is referring to, see these blog posts.) McCain shot back less than two hours later:

"While Senator Obama's two years in the U.S. Senate certainly entitle him to vote against funding our troops, my service and experience combined with conversations with military leaders on the ground in Iraq lead me to believe that we must give this new strategy a chance to succeed because the consequences of failure would be catastrophic to our nation's security.

"By the way, Senator Obama, it's a 'flak' jacket, not a 'flack' jacket."

Who needs policy analysis, right? We've got eighteen months of petty sniping to look forward to!

Actually, this should take the humor out of this whole situation -- the insurgents made an example out of that bazaar McCain visited in a flak jacket, ambushing, binding, and murdereding 23 workers shortly after the Senator's visit.

Stop the Presses: John McCain Voted!

Last week we noted incredulously that John McCain had missed 43 consecutive votes in the Senate (causing commentor JG to write, "You're complaining?! Have you checked his voting record??"). That streak extended three more votes and sadly has now come to an end.

After 46 straight missed votes, encompassing six weeks, John McCain finally found time to push himself back from the money trough of constant fundraising and cast a vote on behalf of the citizens of Arizona. McCain voted in favor of exempting children of certain Filipino World War II veterans from the numerical limitations on immigrant visas. Just so you know.

And, oh yeah, our taxes pay that man's salary. Which, it shouldn't need to be said, he continued to collect even though he failed to fulfill his most important responsibility as a senator.

IRS Terrorism Gumshoes: Look for "Middle Eastern Sounding Names"

Apparently the gumshoes over at the IRS have been investigating nonprofits for potential ties to terrorism in Keystone Cops fashion. According to a report by the agency's watchdog, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, IRS agents pour over nonprofit filings manually, cross-referencing them with a terrorist watch list that is woefully inadequate. "As a result, the IRS provides only minimal assurance that tax-exempt organizations potentially involved in terrorist activities are being identified," the watchdog reports. And that's not even the worst part. Responding to the dismal report in a letter to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson today, Montana Democrat Max Baucus, chair of the Senate Finance Committee, reveals that IRS investigators resorted to racial profiling when looking into potential terrorist financing. "IRS personnel told TIGTA that they primarily look for 'Middle Eastern sounding names' when considering which tax filings to flag for further review." How has this screening process worked out for the IRS? Not very well. Baucus writes: "TIGTA investigators found that the current IRS screening process has never identified any person or organization with links to terrorists."

May 24, 2007

Death Toll Associated with 9/11 Still Climbing

Nearly six years after two planes crashed into the Twin Towers, the number of deaths associated with the attacks " target="new">continues to climb. Yesterday, the death toll reached 2,750 after Dr. Charles Hirsch, New York City's chief medical examiner, amended the death certificate of civil rights attorney Felicia Dunn-Jones. Previously, she had been thought to have died of natural causes. Her certificate now notes that exposure to toxic dust from the ruins of the World Trade Center "was contributory to her death." Dunn-Jones' certificate is the first to be amended, but perhaps not the last.

More than 7,300 people, including New York City police officers, firemen, and other first responders who inhaled toxins during the city's 10-month cleanup effort, filed a class-action lawsuit against the city, complaining of deteriorating respiratory health.

New York Representatives Carolyn Maloney and Vito Fossella, who pushed for a review of Dunn-Jones' case, are continuing to pressure the city's medical examiner to review other cases. Although Hirsch has no plans to do so, his decision to amend Dunn-Jones' death certificate could have far-reaching implications and is likely to be cited as evidence in 9/11-related health suits filed against New York City.

Rudy Giuliani may also catch fire from these suits. The city's mayor, who has framed his presidential campaign around his 9/11 heroism, is facing criticism for his administration's handling of safety measures during the cleanup effort. The New York Times reported earlier this month that, according to public documents filed in a suit, the city "never meaningfully enforced federal requirements that those at the site wear respirators" and "officials also on some occasions gave flawed public representations of the nature of the health threat, even as they privately worried about exposure to lawsuits by sickened workers."

--Jessica Savage

Finally Time to Go Home to Diego Garcia

Americans may have never heard of Diego Garcia, but today Diego Garcia is very much on the minds of thousands of people.

After more than four decades, Chagossians get to go home to Diego Garcia, a British colony and US air and naval base. Yesterday the British High Court ruled in favor of the Chagossian people. The judges denounced the British government's move to "exile a whole population" from its home as "repugnant" and that the right of Chagossians to return home is "one of the most fundamental liberties known to human beings". The High Court also said that the government can no longer appeal as it had unsuccessfully tried three times in the past. Chagossians had won a legal victory in 2000, but in 2004 the British government overturned it via a royal prerogative.

Why were they kicked off in the first place? The British colony has been "colonized by the Americans" since the 1960's, when more than 2,000 inhabitants of the island were forcibly "repatriated" to Mauritius and the Seychelles. The Brits gave the Americans a 50-year lease, which will expire in 2016. The U.S. has launched memorable military campaigns from the Diego Garcia base, including bombing Afghanistan and Iraq.

In the past years, the US military said it was against the idea of allowing Chagossians back to their land because it would undermine the "security" of Diego Garcia. And while it has fought to keep the natives off the land, the US Navy still calls the Diego Garcia base its "Footprint of Freedom."

—Neha Inamdar

Now You Can Shoot an Iraqi from the Comfort of Your Own Home Computer

It's not just a video game. A performance artist has been holed up in Chicago with a webcam and paintball gun trained on him. Right now Wafaa Bilal is out (late lunch?), leaving just a bedroom splattered with paint, so Web snipers are aiming for the plant instead. It's a statement on that American combination of high-tech trigger-happiness and apathy toward Iraqis. I was going to suggest Bilal was inspired by this technology, "computer-assisted remote hunting." But it's much worse. According to his bio, Bilal grew up in Iraq, and his 21-year-old brother still there was recently killed by stray American gunfire. Maybe he's trying to heal by reenacting the trauma, as they say. Black humor heals all wounds.

Thank you for the tip, Goode.

Oklahoma Bans Abortion in State Hospitals

We were hoping the governor of Oklahoma would veto a ban on abortion in state hospitals, with exception for only rape, incest, and when a woman's health is in jeopardy. But Gov. Brad Henry, a Democrat, let it pass yesterday. Here's the fate of other abortion bills this week.

"Adolescents Play Pranks..."

Last November, someone set fire to the central wing of a high school in Jena, Louisiana. Then white students beat up a black student because he went to their party. Soon after that, a white adolescent pulled a shotgun on three black adolescents in a convenience store, and then four black students jumped a white student as he came out of the school gym. Following that incident, in which the student received minor injuries, six black students were expelled and were charged with attempted second-degree murder. They face up to a hundred years in prison.

Conversely, the white boy who beat up the student at the party was charged with simple battery, and the boy who held three others at shotgunpoint was not charged with anything. However, his victims were charged with aggravated battery and theft after they grabbed the shotgun in self-defense.

If this sounds like scenes from a 1950s newsreel, that's because Jena is stuck in time when it comes to the issue of racial equality. Enter Jena mayor Murphy McMillian, who says that "Race is not a major local issue. It's not a factor in the local people's lives."

No kidding--he said that.

The latest incident at the high school involves some black students who attempted to sit on the "white side" of the school yard. There, they saw three nooses hanging from a tree. Enter school superindendent Roy Breithaupt, who says that "Adolescents play pranks. I don't think it was a threat against anybody."

Again, he really said that.

The Jena community isn't alone in dismissing violence and threats against women, people of color, the disabled, and members of the LGBT community as "pranks" and "jokes." But this particular piece of denial is so over the top, it would probably shock most reasonable people. The local ACLU calls Jena a "racial powder keg."

Immigration Bill Changing: Guest Worker Program Halved

Two days ago I wrote that the guest worker program in the Senate's immigration bill would probably be the first provision to be changed or killed. That's exactly what has happened.

Yesterday the Senate overwhelmingly voted to cut the guest worker program in half. Now instead of 400,000 immigrants receiving visas annually to work temporarily in the United States, only 200,000 will. The votes to reduce the number came from Democrats who see the guest worker program as a repeat of the bracero program intended to provide cheap labor to big business and Republicans who see the whole bill as soft on illegal immigration. Pro-business Republicans voted to keep the number at 400,000.

See how the vote broken down along party lines here. See Mother Jones massive and excellent feature on immigration, "Exodus," here.

ABC Story on Covert Ops in Iran: Romney Can't See an Obvious Government Plant

The ABC News story about covert operations in Iran just turned into a political football, and Mitt Romney, in seeking to emphasize his tough guy credentials yet again, is making an ass of himself.

Two days ago, ABC's investigative unit revealed that the "CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert "black" operation to destabilize the Iranian government." But the CIA isn't allowed to kill anyone because the presidential finding authorizing the black op is "non-lethal." In fact, the main thrust of the thing is informational and financial -- the CIA is charged with executing a "coordinated campaign of propaganda, disinformation, and manipulation of Iran's currency and international financial transactions." This is according to current and former officials in the intelligence community.

Now, Kevin Drum makes a couple very good points. The whole leak is suspicious. Insiders go to the press when they feel the CIA or any other government agency has clearly crossed the line -- the NSA wiretapping story, for example, was uncovered by the New York Times because government officials were willing to come forward and say, "This is totally not kosher and public outrage is the only way we have of putting a stop to it." As Drum writes, this business about "disinformation" and "manipulation of Iran's currency" is "just about the mildest possible covert operation you can imagine. Why would anyone at the CIA, let alone multiple sources, be so outraged by it that they decided to leak its existence to ABC News?"

It's a good question. Moreover, writes Drum, "the CIA is mostly populated by hardnosed Republicans who hate countries like Iran and love covert operations like this that strike back at them. It's their bread and butter.... they really, really don't make a habit of disclosing active covert operations to major news organizations. That can get people killed, whether the operation itself is lethal or not."

So the CIA has no reason to be up in a tizzy about this new presidential authorization to go after Iran. Then why did multiple members of the intelligence community go to the press? Drum speculates this was a plant coordinated by the government "as a way of sending a message to Iran."

Supporting Drum's theory is the fact, recently revealed by ABC, that the White House had six days to register any objection at all to the story, and they chose not to act.

The story pretty clearly came out with the Bush Administration's consent.

But that isn't stopping Mitt Romney from trying to score cheap political points. The web is flooded with stories blaring the headline "Romney: ABC Story Puts Lives at Risk." Says Romney, "The reporting has the potential of jeopardizing our national security... it has the potential of affecting human life."

The president of ABC News, David Westin, shot back that ABC wouldn't run a story (and hasn't run stories in the past) that put lives at risk, and that American covert ops in Iran have been reported before. "The facts don't bear out the accusations (from Romney)," Westin said. "I even think that any brief look at the facts says that. This is not a complicated one."

Romney isn't dumb. He has to know this is a story the government intended to put in the public sphere, either to send a message to Iran, as Drum wrote, or amidst news that Iran is three to eight years from having a nuclear weapon, to send a message to the American people. "We're doing something about this," they're saying. "Don't worry." Romney knows this. But it's an opportunity to look macho. Chest-puffing, on display during the second GOP debate when the topic of torture came up, is perhaps the most obscene and disgusting part of the GOP primary.

Oh, and PS -- I'd be willing to bet a ton of money that there are other, more "lethal" covert ops going on in Iran right now, but no official in the intelligence community would ever come forward to tell the press, because it would be a PR nightmare for the CIA and could more directly jeopardize national security.

May 23, 2007

Joe Klein and John Kerry: Gross

Michael Crowley excerpts a portion of Bob Shrum's memoir on The Plank today. Shrum, for those who have managed to keep their minds unpoisoned by the insanity of Washington's consultant circles, is a man who has consulted for eight Democratic presidential candidates. All eight have lost. You might think after the fourth, fifth, or sixth loss Shrum would be out of work. You obviously don't know anything about politics.

Shrum writes at length about his experience as a consultant for John Kerry's 2004 campaign. Crowley highlights a disturbing passage about Time columnist and world class blowhard Joe Klein:

Klein himself was trying to play many parts. He was not only reporting on the campaign and preparing to write a book about consultants; he was also a constant critic and yet another sometime adviser. After the Kerry appearance at the Iowa Jefferson-Jackson Day dinner, he told [Kerry spokesman] David Wade: "Great speech, but it's too late" -- then turned around and stalked away. With Klein, it was almost always too late for us, in part because we didn't always take his persistent advice. He would chastise Kerry on the phone when he didn't like a speech, counseling both Kerry and me about what the candidate should say and what our strategy should be.

Okay, so it's weird (and probably unethical) that a famous journalist who writes regularly about the presidential campaign is advising one of the candidates. But here's something even more odd:

Rejecting [Klein's] advice was uncomfortable for Kerry, who liked Joe, craved his approval, and worried what his columns would say when we didn't take his recommendations.

Jesus! I'm not even angry that I supported a guy so insecure and unsure of his convictions that he considered how a egomaniacal columnist would evaluate his actions before he took them. I'm angry that I work in a profession where writers and their subjects become so intertwined that it affects the subjects' behavior. How can one reasonably argue that it doesn't affect the writers' also?

I'm not one of the bloggers who criticizes journalists and their sources for running in the same social circles. I've always assumed that these people can separate their personal feelings and professional responsibilities. But if this is how journalism works inside the beltway, good heavens, count me out.

Spellings' Grade: Needs Improvement

Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings has an uncanny ability to whisk responsibility away from her turf, the Department of Education. In the first 30 seconds of her Daily Show interview last night, she laughingly deferred Jon Stewart's joke about Lunchables to agriculture officials, and Stewart's food pyramid question to Health and Human Services.

But her "hands are tied" arguments are wearing thin.

With inappropriate dealings in the $85 billion student loan industry widely reported, alleged mishandling of the Reading First early literacy program and the pending reauthorization of No Child Left Behind this year, she's got a lot of stepping up to do.

One education blogger even draws parallels between Spellings and Alberto Gonzalez, saying that if Gonzalez weren't hogging the spotlight so much right now, Spellings would be getting more attention.

That's not the comparison to be shooting for, especially with her qualifications in question. After admitting to during a Labor, Health and Human Services Appropriations Subcommittee hearing in March that the only teaching she had ever done was as an uncertified substitute early in her career, and that her college pursuits were in political science and journalism, one frustrated congressman said there was a "disconnect" in her ability to execute on meaningful public policy.

Still, Spellings stood firm on these issues during a recent oversight committee hearing testimony, and recently told NPR that she feels "very good" about the "aggressive role" she has taken in the "raging fire" that is American higher education policy. Problem is, she also called the student loan scandals a "teaching moment for us," too.

—Gary Moskowitz

Fred Thompson Shuts Down His PAC--And There Goes His Son's Income

Former Tennessee senator, stunningly bad actor, and possible presidential candidate Fred Thompson has seen fit to shut down his political action committee. The PAC in question has raised $66,700 for election campaigns and committees in the four years it has been in existence. It has also paid $178,000 in consulting fees to Daniel Thompson Associates. Daniel is Fred Thompson's son, and while it is legal to hire a family member to consult for your PAC, it is quite obviously questionable for that family member to get more than two and a half times the funds raised to support the PAC's reason for being.

Thompson, who is known for how little he accomplished in the U.S. Senate, is getting a closer look from the Center for Responsive Politics.

DA Refuses to Prosecute Rape Case, Despite Eye Witnesses, DNA

What's the penalty for the alleged gangrape of a drunk, 17-year-old girl at a party with 10 of your buddies? Bupkus, said the Santa Clara, California District Attorney's office yesterday.

The alleged rape occurred March 3 at a wild, off-campus party hosted by a member of the DeAnza College men's baseball team in San Jose, California. Three partygoers, members of the school's women's soccer team, said they saw a young girl on a mattress on the floor, clothes around her ankles and vomit on her face, with one man on top of her and approximately 10 more looking on in a dark bedroom. Feeling "something wasn't right," the girls pushed their way into the room and rushed the victim the the hospital.

In the months since the contested rape, a grand jury has taken testimony in the case, DNA samples from some partygoers have been obtained, but an assistant district attorney cited "insufficient evidence" as the reason the DA would not prosecute. The men will not be charged with a crime, not even statutory rape. The only consequences so far have been that eight baseball players were suspended, resulting in the cancellation of three games. At least one of the players brought in by the grand jury thinks justice has been served: "From the beginning, I kind of felt like it was a witch hunt and the De Anza players were victims, and not really this girl," pitcher Chris Knopf told the San Jose Mercury News.

One of the infamous Duke lacrosse players made a similar statement just last month when prosecutors dropped all charges in that case, saying that “this entire experience has opened my eyes up to a tragic world of injustice." He was talking about himself, not the African American stripper hired for the players' party.

Undoubtedly, the Duke case and its rush to judgment is in the minds of those at the Santa Clara DA's office when they say they don't have confidence the case could be proved without a doubt. The District Attorney in the Duke case, Michael Nifong, was removed from the case and now faces ethics complaints from the North Carolina state bar related to the year-long investigation. The Santa Clara DA office may be looking to avoid a similar debacle. But there are essential differences in the two situations: this girl was underage, and three eyewitnesses have come forward.

Granted, eyewitness accounts are not always what they seem, something the media often glosses over, but the Santa Clara sheriff's office says it's not yet done investigating the case. Two of the witnesses have gone to the media to draw attention to the case. "What we saw was rape. It was a crime," one told told a local television station. The other said the lack of charges "makes us think that no girl is ever going to want to come forward and say they were violated as this girl was, because they're going to think it doesn't even matter...But it does."

—Jen Phillips

Another Reason to Expect Dem Victory in '08: Low GOP Turnout

From time to time, members of the liberal blogosphere will ask their brethren to slow the '08 optimism. Yes, the Republican frontrunners are all comically out of step with the GOP base, but one of them has to win the primary, and at that point the winner's moderate stances will make him appealing to independents. It may be a tougher road for the Dems than anyone thinks.

My response is this. Yes, some independents may find Romney's previous embrace of gay rights appealing, and some may find Giuliani's pro-choice position attractive, and yet others may find McCain's history of bucking the Republican party line honest and refreshing. I'll concede that: let's say the Republicans manage as much support from independents at the Democrats do.

The Republicans are still more likely to lose. Why? Because the Republican base is so depressed by their options and so sick of the mismanagement of the people they sent to the White House last time that they won't vote. And now my theory has evidence to back it up:

In Kentucky's gubernatorial primary, held yesterday, 348,759 Dems cast votes in the Democratic primary. Only 202,131 Republicans cast votes in the GOP one, despite the GOP race being higher profile. That's less than two-thirds, and in a reliably red state! It's irrefutable: Republican voters are disillusioned, and disillusioned voters don't make contributions, don't walk precincts, and don't head to the polling booth on election day.

Now consider this: if just five percent of the voters who voted for Bush in 2004 choose to stay home in 2008, and the Democratic nominee gets the same number of votes as Kerry, the Democrat wins the popular vote. You can find 2004 results here, do the math yourself.

And the Democrats' X-factor? No Karl Rove pulling get-out-the-vote magic tricks out of his hat.

Romney Takes Lead in GOP Field and the Knives Come Out

With frontrunner status comes increased scrutiny. Is that bad news for Mitt Romney?

According to new polls, the former one-term governor of Massachusetts is leading the Republican field in Iowa and New Hampshire. And leading in a big way: the Des Moines Register puts Romney at 30 percent in Iowa, compared to 18 for McCain and 17 for Giuliani. A Zogby poll in New Hampshire shows Romney at 35 percent, with both McCain and Giuliani stuck at 19. Those are leads big enough to withstand the vagaries of public opinion.

A quick aside: Giuliani lost his lofty lead as Republican voters began to hear more and more about his positions on social issues, the conventional wisdom goes. Then how to explain Romney's rise? He previously held all of the same positions as Giuliani -- he's just trying to lie about them while Giuliani is standing for what he believes in. Says a political scientist at Northeastern University in Boston, "After studying presidential nominations for 30 years, I've never seen somebody who has so completely renounced his past record when he decided to run for president." That's what the GOP wants? That's the best they can get?

Anyway. McCain, for one, isn't taking the Romney Rise quite so well. Quotes from the McCain camp include:

"The question for voters is, does a one-term governor from Massachusetts have the foreign policy experience necessary to deal with the challenges of today's world?"

And:

"Mitt Romney has been consistent in one regard: that nearly every position he holds now is opposite of what it was when he was governor of Massachusetts."

So now all the pot shots are directed at Romney, and they will continue to be until someone else takes the lead. I'm sure Romney, Giuliani, and McCain are all loading up attacks on Fred Thompson, should he step into the ring jump out to a strong start. The media scrutiny gets tougher too. AlterNet is slamming Romney for having a poor record on diversity and minorities, and Time recently published "Tongue Tied - Mitt Romney's Top Ten Gaffes." The question for presidential contenders is not who can earn the spotlight, but who can survive it.

OSC Nails a Low-Level Bushie -- Does That Prove Rove Guilty, Too?

There's little reason to have faith in the Office of Special Counsel (OSC): it's run by a partisan political appointee named Scott Bloch who intentionally ignores part of the office's mission -- protecting whistleblowers -- and instead devotes his time to rooting out any sign of the "homosexual agenda." His investigation of Karl Rove's potential violations of the Hatch Act, which prohibits government employees from using official time/resources for political purposes, is likely just an attempt to save his own job and a dodge intended to ward off much tougher congressional investigation.

But at least Bloch got Lurita Doan. Yup, the chief of the hilariously vague General Services Administration (GSA) is the target of a OSC report that says when Doan sat down 40 or so political appointees under her command at GSA headquarters for a presentation from Scott Jennings, the White House deputy director of political affairs, she was in violation of the Hatch Act.

Jennings' presentation was exactly what the Hatch Act forbids. He delivered a PowerPoint that contained slides listing Democratic and Republican seats the White House viewed as vulnerable in 2008 and a map of contested Senate seats. It held other information about the lay of the political land heading into the 2008 elections. After the meeting, Doan asked how the GSA could help "our candidates."

Doan has until June 1 to respond (i.e. defend herself or resign), after which point President Bush can take action. The woman is demonstratively in violation of federal law: hard to argue she shouldn't lose her job. The real question is, if Doan is in violation of the Hatch Act, isn't Jennings as well? And isn't his boss, Karl Rove, since Rove presumably sent Jennings to the GSA?

May 22, 2007

Bush's Chief Domestic Policy Adviser: "I Am Never Going To Hire Another Woman Because They Just Get Pregnant and Leave."

Whew! That's just one of the great tidbits in this TNR piece on Karl Zinsmeister, the man who replaced Claude Allen.

(Allen, if you recall, had to step down after he was nailed for shoplifting. At Hetch's. I guess you'd have to hail from DC to know how depressing that is.)

Before replacing Allen, Zinsmeister was editor of American Enterprise—the mag of the conservative think-thank the American Enterprise Institute—where he was so hated by employees that they basically demanded he be fired or they all quit.

The pregnancy discrimination remark is just one of a laundry list allegations his former employees make against him. Well worth the read.

Finally, New York City Greens Its Taxicabs

Guess how many miles per gallon those yellow Crown Victorias get? About 10 to 15 mpg. That's on par if not worse than an SUV. But things are changing. Bloomberg proposed this morning to require all new vehicles entering the fleet to get at least 25 mpg, then 30 mpg the year after. One complaint: it won't take effect for another year and a half, not until October 2008. Still, it's a great, long-awaited move.

Good Heavens, There's Going to be a Second Surge

Because this one is going so well, you know.

New reports say that we're to have a second surge. If current Pentagon plans are followed, there will be over 200,000 American soldiers in Iraq by the end of 2007, the largest troop presence we've had there to date.

This is completely stunning news. There will likely be tons of analysis of this across the web, but some initial thoughts:

(1) The White House and the Pentagon are officially completely unresponsive to the wills of the people and Congress. If you weren't already convinced.

(2) Michael Hirsh was 100 percent correct.

(3) This is a full renunciation of the Rumsfeldian way of making war. A lean fighting force can beat an opposing army but it can't secure the peace -- we should have had 200,000 troops or more at the beginning of the war. If we had, there's a small chance we'd be in a position to withdraw victoriously today.

(4) Will this make the Democrats reconsider dropping timelines for withdrawal from their latest Iraq funding bill?

The Strange Case of Bill Richardson's Birth

Many of you know that New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson formally announced his presidential candidacy yesterday. He's been effectively running for months now, so this isn't really news. The only two things of note about the announcement were that Richardson spoke in Spanish and in English, highlighting his roots, and that he made the announcement in California, highlighting that state's new role as a power base in national politics.

Okay, fine. You already knew Richardson is Hispanic and you already knew California is important. Bet you didn't know this:

The candidate Mr. Richardson is more formally known as William Blaine Richardson 3d, the grandson on a Boston-born naturalist who had moved his family to Nicaragua in the late 1890s to do research for the Smithsonian Institution. His own father, William B. Richardson Jr., was actually born on a boat heading to Nicaragua and, according to an interview with Mr. Richardson in the Washington Post, always had a complex about not being born in America.

When Mr. Richardson’s father became a banker in Mexico City and married his Mexican secretary, he did not want his son to suffer the same fate.

So, in November 1947, when his mother, Maria Luisa Lopez-Collada Marquez, was pregnant with him, Mr. Richardson’s father sent her on a train to Pasadena where she gave birth before turning around and heading back to Mexico City, where Mr. Richardson was raised before being sent to boarding school in Massachusetts at age 13.

I love it! Richardson is basically an immigrant! I think that is completely awesome -- no wonder he has the best line on immigration reform: "No fence ever built has stopped history."

Armed Man Wounded Trying to Defend Idaho Town from Shooter

Gun rights groups responded to the Virginia Tech shooting by saying that if more students had been packing heat, they could have stopped Cho. A writer in the National Review even blamed the victims for not defending themselves, as Jon blogged. It's not just rhetoric. Texas Gov. Rick Perry and state legislators are actually considering repealing the ban on guns on campus. Rep. Frank Corte Jr., a Republican from San Antonio, said gun-free zones are known "by the bad guys that this is where people don't have firearms."

Well, an armed student was wounded trying to defend an Idaho college town against a man on a shooting rampage last weekend. In Moscow, Idaho, Jason Hamilton "shot and killed one law enforcement officer and wounded Pete Husmann, 20, a University of Idaho mechanical engineering student from Coeur d'Alene. Husmann had armed himself and run to the sound of the shots."

Major Changes to Supreme Court Under Next Presidential Administration

Over at SCOTUSblog, they posted on Friday about the Supreme Court ramifications of the 2008 presidential election. It looks like the next president will definitely have the opportunity to replace Justice Stevens (who is 87 years old) and Justice Souter (who is 67 but reportedly interested in leaving the bench). He or she might also have the chance to replace Justice Ginsburg (who is 74). A strong liberal, Ginsburg would allow a Democratic president to replace her, but would try and hold out until 2012 if a Republican won the White House. SCOTUSblog raises and then dismisses rumors of Ginsburg's poor health.

The court has already shifted right during Bush's tenure -- replacing Rehnquist with Roberts meant little because both men were/are devoted conservatives, but replacing O'Connor with Alito was a major ideological shift. Abortion, for example, went from being reasonably well protected to being on a path to a death by a thousand cuts. If two or possibly three moderate-to-liberal members of the court were replaced by a Republican in the next presidential term, the result would be disatrous. Even a Democratic Senate wouldn't be able to stop the country from a multi-decade tilt to the right. Major ramifications would be in store for gay rights, environment regulations, controls on executive power, and many other things. Roe wouldn't have a snowball's chance in hell.

As if we needed any more reason to throw the GOP out of the White House...

Guest Worker Proviso in Immigration Bill May be First to Die

People across the spectrum are slamming the Senate's new immigration bill (including us). It looks like a classic Washington compromise: in seeking to please everyone it ended up pleasing no one.

The first part of the bill to face the firing squad? The guest worker program. Two amendments have been introduced by Democrats -- one seeking to kill the program entirely and one seeking to cut it in half.

As currently constituted, the guest worker program in the bill grants 400,000 visas annually to people who can work in the United States for three two-year stretches, provided they return to their home countries between stretches. It should be noted that the "return home" clause in the bill is a major vulnerability, because many immigrants simply don't trust the government to let them back in, and have no intention of leaving the U.S. for any reason.

While the most virulent opposition to the bill has come from the far right, it should be no surprise that the Democrats are the ones working to end the guest worker program. Some Democrats showed cautious support for the guest worker program back when President Bush proposed it because it granted some immigrants the right to earn a living in this country, which seemed more progressive than the "throw them out!" alternative. But they knew full well that the guest worker program was (and still is) a sop to the GOP's corporate friends. Big business is drooling at the idea of an underclass of workers who have few to no labor rights and push down wages for American citizens who do.

We'll see if the guest worker program ends up in the final version of the bill -- Senators want an acceptable revision ready before they head out for a week-long break for Memorial Day, but many senators haven't even read the full bill. Oh, and the Republicans also have a shot at proposing amendments. Here's a possible one:

No word yet what Republicans will offer as an amendment but Sen. James Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, said Monday he's hoping it will be his proposal to make English the official language of the U.S.

Update, one day later: The amendments have been defeated. We'll keep an eye on what happens to the guest worker program as the bill moves forward.

May 21, 2007

Two Governors Threaten to Draw Their Guns and Settle Tailpipe Dispute with the EPA "Once and for All"

Arnold Schwarzenegger and Gov. Jodi M. Rell of Connecticut railed against the EPA in an op-ed today in the Washington Post. The EPA is STILL preventing states from raising their own auto emissions standards. This is the same case over which the state of California sued the EPA--and won last month. Twelve states are poised to tighten tailpipe standards beyond existing federal law, but for more than a year, the EPA has refused to allow it.

Even after the Supreme Court ruled in our favor last month, the federal government continues to stand in our way. Another discouraging sign came just last week, when President Bush issued an executive order to give federal agencies until the end of 2008 to continue studying the threat of greenhouse gas emissions and determine what can be done about them.

As we blogged, a clear majority of Americans in surveys say they are really worried about climate change. Seven in 10 want more "much more" federal action .

Like gubernatorial cowboys, the two also threatened that if the administration and the EPA continue this way, they will "take legal action and settle this issue once and for all." Bring it on!

The Senate Immigration Plan Is a Turkey: An Unbiased Primer

If you step back and think about resolving our immigration woes, two guiding principles spring to mind: A policy that thwarts the basic economic needs that have empirically made immigrants willing to break the law is bound to fail. Immigration policy must also be clearly enforceable. The bipartisan immigration bill being debated in the Senate this week defies both of these common sense assumptions.

The bill would create two new classes of visa. The Y visa is a "guest worker" visa. It would be valid for 2 years and renewable up to three times, but the worker would have to leave the United States for a full year before renewing. The Z visa offers pay-to-play amnesty to employed illegal immigrants: To obtain the 4-year renewable visa, immigrants must pay a $5,000 fine and a $1,500 processing fee for a criminal background check. If they had $6,500 lying around, they wouldn't be risking their lives to cross the border, now would they?

David Leopold of the American Immigration Lawyers Association put it this way: "What's the incentive for somebody to leave and come back? The more complex it is, the more difficult it will be for people to qualify, which will lead to the same sort of unsolvable illegal population problem that we have now."

The Senate bill would also restructure the system for determining who gets a visa. Currently, would-be immigrants move to the front of the line if they have family in the United States or are sponsored by a specific employer. Under the new plan, immigrants would earn points for job skills, education, and English proficiency. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi objects that the change would undermine "family unification principles which have been fundamental to American immigration."

The plan may be mean, but it's not mean in a self-serving way because it probably wouldn't serve us very well. The point-system would often exclude hyper-qualified foreigners whom employers want not because they can pay them peanuts but because they're the most qualified for the job. It would also hurt the immigrants who, as President Bush says, take the jobs Americans don't want—jobs like those at Wal-Mart, Marriott, and the National Restaurant Association (groups which tellingly sponsored a recent immigration-reform dinner).

Low-wage industries likely won't be the only ones squeezed. The point system has been rejected in the past because the government bureaucracy assigning the points wouldn't be able to keep up with the changes in market forces. As a liberal who often believes the government can do things better than the market, I'm with the free-marketeers on this one.

The good news is, the plan has about as much chance of succeeding as a government bureaucracy has of fitting through the eye of a needle. The same employers who wanted reform in the first place are outraged—outraged—that they would be expected to verify workers' eligibility. They might even have a point. The government wants them to reverify all workers, including U.S. citizens. That's 145 million people. And in a test run of the system the government proposes to use, there were lots of "false alarms, with as many as 20 percent of noncitizens and 13 percent of citizens sent for follow-up visits to immigration offices."

The Post concludes wryly:

Security mix-ups that keep travelers from boarding airplanes could pale in comparison with database problems that block Americans from their work.

Yes, we'd have the government standing in the way of Americans earning a legal living based on a system error. Now that is a really bad policy.

Gingrich Continues To Ride the Christian Right Bandwagon

On Saturday, ethically challenged former House Speaker Newt Gingrich gave the commencement address at Liberty University, the school founded by Jerry Falwell. This was the second time the former speaker has delivered the Liberty commencement address. In his speech, Gingrich quoted Bible verses and warned graduates against "the growing culture of radical secularism."

"A growing culture of radical secularism declares that the nation cannot profess the truths on which it was founded," Gingrich said. "We are told that our public schools can no longer invoke the creator, nor proclaim the natural law nor profess the God-given quality of human rights."

Gingrich, who is considering a run for the presidency in 2008, faced 84 ethics charges when he was House Speaker, including tax violations, perjury and reckless disregard of House rules. He was sanctioned, and resigned from Congress. He also gained notoriety for visiting his cancer-recovering first wife in her hospital bed to get her to sign divorce papers. After the divorce, a church organization helped the family financially because Gingrich did not pay any child support. He divorced his second wife because he was having an affair with a young Congressional aide.

According to the late Falwell, Gingrich "genuinely sought forgiveness" for his sins.

May 25, 2007

May 24, 2007

May 23, 2007

May 22, 2007

May 21, 2007

RECENT ENTRIES

ARCHIVE

RECENT COMMENTS

SEARCH MOTHER JONES

TODAY ON...

BLOG LINKS

IN PRINT

DONATE TODAY