Obama's 100th Day Called 'Great Day For Advancing Equal Protection, Justice'

The House approved long-awaited hate crimes legislation in what was a series of steps Washington policymakers took to bolster equality and non-discrimination on what was President Obama's 100th day in office.

The House passed H.R. 1913, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009, by a vote of 249 to 175. The Justice Department also issued a recommendation to end disparity in sentencing for crimes involving crack and powder cocaine.

"Throughout our history, this nation has sought to uphold the ideals of our founding -- that all are created equal and endowed by our Creator with inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," says House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. "Today, with the passage of federal hate crimes legislation, we have affirmed these ideals and the inclusiveness that our nation stands for by extending the protection of its laws to all: 'one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.'

"Throughout our history, this nation has sought to uphold the ideals of our founding - that all are created equal and endowed by our Creator with inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Today, with the passage of federal hate crimes legislation, we have affirmed these ideals and the inclusiveness that our nation stands for by extending the protection of its laws to all: 'one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.'

The legislation is intended to help protect Americans against violence based on sexual orientation, race, religion, gender, national origin, disability, or gender identity. Companion legislation was introduced this week in the Senate. President Obama has expressed his strong support for the bill, and urged lawmakers to support it.

"Congress has been debating federal hate crimes legislation for 17 years. It was more than 10 years ago that Matthew Shepard was brutally murdered," Pelosi adds, referring to a gay man beaten and killed in Montana, in 1998. "The time for debate is long over. I am proud that today the House has acted and in so doing, honored this nation's commitment to the ideals of justice, equality and opportunity."

Hate crimes against the gay community increased 24 percent nationwide in 2007, according to Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG), citing the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs. Especially startling increases occurred in Michigan (up 207 percent), Minnesota (up 135 percent) and in Los Angeles, which saw a 100 percent increase in anti-gay violence. Anti-gay murders also doubled during the same period, the coalition reported. PFLAG supports the approval of the House bill.

"Today -- the 100th day of the Obama Administration -- is a great day for advancing the cause of equal protection and justice in law for all Americans in two significant ways," says Rep. Chaka Fattah (D-Pa.). "I'm pleased to have advocated for and supported major legislation regarding hate crimes that won bipartisan approval in the House of Representatives this afternoon."

Further, Fattah expressed support for a Justice move to end overt disparities found in the sentencing between those who use crack cocaine and those who use powdered cocaine -- casting it as a matter of racial equality.

"The law requires a mandatory sentence of five years without parole for possessing five grams of crack cocaine while possession of the same amount of powder cocaine is a misdemeanor and requires no prison time," the Philadelphia lawmaker says. "This is decidedly unequal protection, resulting in sharp and horribly unfair racial inequity in punishment while unnecessarily clogging our court and prison systems. African Americans and Latinos are greater users of crack cocaine and have been harshly punished for crimes of the same nature as their white counterparts who use powder cocaine."

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:



Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

NEWS ANALYSIS: Arlen Specter Switches, But Is His Fanciest Footwork Still Ahead?

Democrats are celebrating Sen. Arlen Specter's decision to join their ranks, only weeks after the longtime Pennsylvania Republican pointedly closed the door on such a switch.

But it's Specter's next act that may be the one to watch, as to how he soothes a soured relationship with a critical aspect of his new party's base -- organized labor -- and whether he can dance his way out of a huge disagreement with unions over so-called card check legislation.

Specter's decision to bolt the GOP came as a surprise across Washington and Pennsylvania, as the five-term lawmaker publicly rejected such suggestions made by Vice President Joe Biden and others.

Democrats hailed the decision as a major boost for President Obama's legislative program.

"The extreme right wing lost the American people in 2006 and 2008. Now, they've lost their hold on another moderate voice in the United States Senate," Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey, chairman of the Democrats' Senate campaign operation, says in an email that solicits funds in part to help Specter's re-election next year. "This one's a game-changer. Specter's move immediately improves the prospects of President Obama's bold change agenda."

In his statement announcing the switch, Specter notes 200,000 Pennsylvanians last year switched registrations from Republican to Democrat.

However, Specter will now find himself relying for re-election to the labor unions that are active in the Keystone State -- unions that Specter deeply disappointed by reversing himself and coming out against the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). His newfound opposition to the legislation, which is considered labor's top legislative objective, came as Specter was trying to position himself in what was shaping up as a tough, come-from-behind GOP primary battle against former Rep. Pat Toomey. Specter had supported EFCA in the previous Congress.

In his statement today, Specter explicitly says his opposition with EFCA, also known as "card check," will not change. Bitterly opposed by business interests, EFCA would make it easier for workers to unionize.

Pennsylvania's AFL-CIO is not entirely buying that, however, clearly hoping that the 79-year-old Specter still has some fancy footwork left in him.

"This is a new day for the Employee Free Choice Act and labor law reform," says a statement attributed to AFL-CIO Legislative Affairs Director Bill Samuel. "Sen. Specter has said all along that he recognizes the need to reform our broken labor law system and we will continue to work with Congress to give workers back the freedom to form and join unions and pass legislation that stays true to the [principles] of the Employee Free Choice Act.

"The Employee Free Choice Act is built on three fundamental principles and we believe a bill that stays true to these will become law:

Workers need to have a real choice to form a union and bargain for a better life, free from intimidation;

We have to stop the endless delays; companies can’t just stall to stop workers’ choice;

There have to be real penalties for violating the law."

Clearly, the unions hope that even if its not called EFCA, the new Democratic Specter will embrace these core tenets and champion the labor initiative in a new wrapping.

Organized labor can give Specter 850,000 reasons -- all union members in Pennsylvania, and potential voters -- to learn that dance.

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:



Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

Despite Key Vacanies, Administration Praised For 'Fast, Effective' Swine Flu Response

The Obama administration is winning praise for its "fast and effective response" to the swine flu outbreak, even as key public health offices across the federal government sit vacant.

President Obama himself addressed the spread of the disease today, as officials confirm some 40 cases of the illness nationwide.

The federal government declared a public health emergency. "This is obviously a cause for concern and requires a heightened state of alert," Obama told those gathered at an appearance at the National Academies of Science in Washington to tout his administration's science initiatives. "But it is not a cause for alarm."

A top public-health watchdog group is praising the administration's response, despite being without several top health officials, including confirmed chiefs at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has taken a key role in helping coordinate the government's response at a high level. Richard Besser, acting director of the CDC, is also playing a high-profile role as a public face for the response. A career CDC official, Besser has been leading the Atlanta-based health agency since Jan. 22.

"The administration has taken the right approach to managing the swine flu outbreak, with experts and scientists driving key decisions. The leadership and coordination among CDC, HHS, DHS, and state and local governments are clear and strong," says Jeff Levi, executive director of Trust For America's Health (TFAH). "The preparations the country has made since the National Strategy for Pandemic Influenza was issued in November 2005 are now paying off. In the past three and a half years, we've made monumental improvements in surveillance, coordination, communications, and control and treatment capabilities. Yet, additional resources are needed to adequately prepare the nation for such an impending emergency."

TFAH has long pushed the government to more effectively deal with a pandemic outbreak such as the current spread of swine flu across the globe.

Despite its praise, TFAH urges policymakers to approve an additional $870 million in funding. This funding was originally included in both the regular federal budget for the 2008 fiscal year and proposed 2009 stimulus bill, but was removed each time before the bills' final passage, the organization notes.

With more than $1 billion of HHS funding, six companies are in various stages of implementing commercial-scale production of cell-based methods and/or expanding their vaccine capacity using eggs, TFAH says.

By 2011, U.S.-based vaccine production capacity is expected to be at a point in which it can generate enough pandemic influenza vaccine for every American within six months of the time that the pandemic virus is identified, according to the most recent Pandemic Planning Update from HHS. However, the U.S. will not reach that capacity without completion of the initial investment, TFAH warns.

The organization further urges providing resources for state and local health departments to adequately prepare for outbreaks. State and local officials are the front line responders to outbreaks, as they have been in the days since the swine flu outbreak emerged, yet they have not received any federal funding for pandemic flu preparedness since fiscal year 2006, TFAH says in a statement. The group says $350 million is needed annually to adequately maintain state and local pandemic preparedness activities.

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:


Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

Vulcan In The White House? Newsweek Compares Obama To 'Trek''s Spock

In what might be both an odd, and perhaps apt, tie-in to the upcoming Star Trek movie, Newsweek contributor Steve Daly compares the pointy-eared character Spock to the 44th president of the United States.

Daly writes that it's the Spock plot strands that give the new movie its best shot at once again commanding the zeitgeist. Mr. Spock's cool, analytical nature "feels more fascinating and topical than ever now that we've put a sort of Vulcan in the White House. All through the election campaign, columnists compared President Obama's unflappably logical demeanor and prominent ears with Mr. Spock's. But as Spock's complicated racial backstory is spun out in detail in the new 'Trek'--right back into childhood--the Obama parallels keep deepening. Like Obama, Spock is the product of a mixed marriage (actually, an interstellar mixed marriage), and he suffers blunt manifestations of prejudice as a result. As played by Zachary Quinto, the young Spock loves his human mother, but longs to assimilate completely into his Vulcan father Sarek's ways, eschewing messy emotions the way all Vulcans do."

Daly writes that if Obama watches the movie, due out May 8, "I can imagine he might feel a special empathy for Spock's position, given the chattering class's insistence that he needs to show more emotion, too."

Meanwhile, White House correspondent Holly Bailey reports on Obama's difficult adjustment to his new life inside the White House bubble. He is hardly the first president to complain about the change. But he seems to have had a tougher time adjusting than Bill Clinton or even George W. Bush, in part because he can still remember what it was like to be a normal person.

His temperament has also made the adjustment difficult. Though outgoing in public, Obama was an only child and spent a lot of time alone. That hasn't changed. "He likes solitude, where he can just take a moment and collect his thoughts and breathe," says a close Obama friend. "And in this job, there is none of that."

Senior editor and columnist Jonathan Alter gauges how successful Obama's first 100 days in office have been. "With the help of the economic crisis, Barack Obama has put more points on the board than any president since Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1933, and his public investment greatly exceeds Roosevelt's in constant dollars," Alter writes.

Alter writes that even if you think Obama's wrong, he deserves high marks for articulating a new vision and getting Congress to act. Alter wrote a book about how FDR's debut transformed the country. A president's first few months in office do offer clues about whether he has the tools to handle the job. "More practically, it's very tough to regain your footing if you stumble out of the gate. You can recover politically, but the chance for great domestic leadership is gone."

Investigative correspondent Michael Isikoff reports on FBI agent Ali Soufan, who was known as one of the bureau's top experts on Al Qaeda, and what he saw in 2002 during interrogations of terror suspects, especially Abu Zubaydah. Soufan had a reputation as a shrewd interrogator who could work fluently in both English and Arabic.

Now a security consultant who spends most of his time in the Middle East, Soufan decided to tell the story of his involvement in the interrogations publicly for the first time. "I've kept my mouth shut about all this for seven years," he says. But now, with the declassification of Justice Department memos and the public assertions by Dick Cheney and others that "enhanced" techniques worked, Soufan decided to speak out.

"I was in the middle of this, and it's not true that these [aggressive] techniques were effective," he says. "We were able to get the information about Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a couple of days. We didn't have to do any of this [torture]. We could have done this the right way."

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:



Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

Senate GOP Unexpectedly Stalls Leahy's FBI-Backed Bill To Combat Financial Fraud

Senate Republicans have stalled the Senate’s consideration of bipartisan legislation to strengthen the tools available to law enforcement to combat financial and mortgage fraud, and protect economic recovery efforts from abuse, as well.

That's according to Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee who first introduced the bill, the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act (FERA) in February.

Senate Democrats will try to muster the 60 votes to block a Republican filibuster of the Leahy bill in a rare Saturday session tomorrow.

Senators offered some 18 amendments to the Leahy bill, of which five were adopted and one was defeated in a roll call vote, according to a statement from Leahy's office. Every amendment offered relevant to the underlying fraud enforcement bill has been considered. While the remaining pending amendments are extraneous to the underlying fraud enforcement legislation, Leahy says he and the Democratic leadership proposed to hold votes on each amendment.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) filed for cloture to conclude consideration of the legislation when the agreement was rejected, and a handful of Senate Republicans insisted on extending debate and offering additional, unrelated amendments, the Leahy statement says.

“I think the Majority leader is doing the only thing he can do in this case. And I’m surprised," Leahy says. "As he said, this legislation has strong bipartisan support, and bipartisan sponsorship. It is designed to try to protect people from losing their retirement funds, their homes, their savings for their children to go to college – to protect the American from the mortgage lenders. Everybody, across the political spectrum, has endorsed the bill.

"We voted on every amendment to this bill," Leahy adds. "It’s unfortunate for the people who are seeing their life savings being ripped off by unscrupulous criminals, that we can’t criminalize them in such a way to stop it. I will be here to vote. The irony is that the bill, when it finally gets to a vote, will probably pass overwhelmingly. I thank the leader for what he’s doing.”

FERA would make changes to criminal laws, including criminal fraud, securities law, and money laundering laws; increase the funding available to federal law enforcement agencies to combat mortgage fraud and financial fraud; and revise the False Claims Act to ensure that the government can recover taxpayer dollars lost to fraud, the Leahy statement says.

The bill is designed to prevent financial fraud, including fraud in the spending of funds from President Obama's economic stimulus package, known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

The anti-fraud legislation is supported by the Obama administration, which stated in a "Statement of Administration Policy" on April 20 that it “strongly supports enactment” of the legislation. Last month, FBI Director Robert Mueller testified about the critical need for added resources to combat fraud and other white collar crime. The Department of Justice, the U.S. Secret Service, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, and the Inspector General of the Department of Housing and Urban Development each support the measure, Leahy says.

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:



Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

Demographer: U.S. To Become More Progressive For 20 Years To Come

Demographic trends, particularly an ongoing decline of culturally conservative whites, will push the United States to become increasingly progressive for two decades to come, according to a noted expert on political demography.

"There are a variety of ways in which America has changed demographically and geographically in the last 20 years that have sent things in a more progressive direction," says Ruy Teixeira, a prominent author and fellow at several Washington think tanks. "One of the biggest changes is the decline of the white working class, which is the most conservative element of the population, really. According to exit poll data, the percent of white working class voters is down 15 points in the last 20 years, whereas minority voters who lean pretty heavily progressive are up 11 points, and white collar graduates who have been shifting progressive rapidly in the last couple of decades, they’re up four points."

Other changes that Teixeira sees as important are the professionals, which is a growing occupational group, have shifted pretty heavily toward progressives. Single women, another growing group that has shifted toward progressives, and there’s the burgeoning millennial generation, which is adding about 4 million people to the eligible voter pool every year, he says.

This millennial generation -- people born after 1978 -- are "very heavily progressive," as they went 66 percent to 32 percent for electing Barack Obama president last year, Teixeira notes in a new web video.

It's not only demographics that will move the country further left in the next 20 years, says Teixeira, author or co-author of six books, including The Emerging Democratic Majority.

It will also be in reaction to the failures of the Bush presidency and the ensuing economic meltdown, he says.

"A lot of it’s about how this sort of conservative world view and policies have really become discredited by what’s happened in the past period of time, particularly of course in the last eight years," he says. "The American public, the American voters, are just becoming increasingly convinced that you can’t really solve America’s problems just by turning in everything into the free market; that, in fact, there are problems that only government can make a difference in terms of solving those problems. So, as compared to the Reagan era, when government was viewed as the problem, not as the solution, we now are moving into an era where increasingly, government is viewed as the potential solution for a lot of our problems."

Teixeira says that he sees little for conservatives to grasp onto to regain a secure political footing.

"It’s difficult to make predictions, especially about the future, but if we look at these demographic trends and how they’re unfolding, you don’t see very much that actually strengthens the conservatives’ case or the conservatives’ prospects," he says. "Pretty much all the demographic trends are going to continue moving in progressive directions for the next 20 years."

Of course, Teixeira notes, much will also depend on the success of progressive governance in coming years under Obama and congressional Democrats. Withat success, making the United States a better place, "the potential is there for a durable and pretty strong progressive majority looking pretty far out into the future."

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:



Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

Speaker Marks Earth Day Touting Capitol As 'Shining Example Of Sustainability'

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi observed Earth Day today by noting that Congress has cut the Capitol's carbon emissions by more than 70 percent through the Democratic leaders' 18-month-old "Green The Capitol" initiative. Pelosi also says she wants to be able to mark the next Earth Day having passed climate change legislation.

“Today, on Earth Day—which is a time to recommit ourselves to protecting our planet and our future—we can announce that the House has reduced its carbon emissions by 72 percent—a remarkable achievement for the Congress," Pelosi says. “The Capitol, which serves as a beacon of freedom, is also now a shining example of sustainability. We hope other large institutions will learn lessons on greening from our experience."

Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid launched the "Green The Capitol" plan shortly after Democrats took control of Congress in 2007. Congress moved to purchasing wind power, as well as energy generated from natural gas, and installed energy-efficient lighting. Congressional offices stepped up recycling and other green practices, according to Pelosi's website.

“Our next step in reducing carbon emissions is to help Members’ reduce their personal offices’ carbon footprints and energy use. I thank my colleagues who have committed to this effort and also Chief Administrative Officer Dan Beard for overseeing the Green the Capitol initiative," Pelosi says. “The Green the Capitol initiative is just one way in that Congress is honoring the tradition of Earth Day and helping protect our planet."

Coinciding with the Earth Day observance, Democrats have been pushing hard on legislation to cap carbon emissions nationwide to regulate global climate change. As with other supporters of the climate legislation, Pelosi now ties the measure to economic growth even more strongly than environmental stewardship.

“Our economic recovery and future prosperity hinge on whether the United States will be first in the world in the clean energy economy. For our economy and workers, America must be first. Therefore, we will be first in the creation of a clean energy economy and the investments in science and innovation that will produce good paying jobs for our workers," the California Democrat says. “Clean energy and fighting climate change are the flagship issues of this Congress. We have shown that though our Green the Capitol initiative. We will further illustrate our commitment by passing clean energy legislation this year."

Pelosi acknowledges the uphill climb to pass climate legislation this year, which faces stiff Republican opposition. GOP opponents are pushing back hard against tying climate regulation to job creation. Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, a key climate change opponent and ranking Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, released a statement for Earth Day citing a report saying clean energy will not make up for traditional manufacturing jobs lost in the economy.

"This will be one of the most complex legislative efforts ever undertaken by any Congress," she says. "It will require the broad coalition of business, agriculture, technology, environmental, and faith groups who have joined us today to move this legislation forward and to enact it into law."

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:



Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

New National Service Law Turns 9/11 Anniversary 'Into Force For Good'

The anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks will be a national day of service and remembrance, due to a provision of national service legislation signed into law today by President Obama.

Obama today signed into law the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act, which for the first time includes federal authorization to establish September 11 as an annually recognized National Day of Service and Remembrance.

Proponents of designating the September 11 anniversary took part in today's bill signing.

"Today President Barack Obama created a historic, enduring and compassionate legacy that truly honors the 9/11 victims and their families, first responders and rescue and recovery workers, the soldiers who have take up arms to defend our freedom and safety, and the many volunteers who spontaneously contributed their efforts in the immediate aftermath of 9/11," says David Paine, founder and president of MyGoodDeed.org, the nonprofit group that led a seven-year campaign to formally establish 9/11 as an annually recognized day of service and remembrance. "There isn't a better or more fitting way to remember 9/11 than for all of us as Americans to voluntarily set aside time on the anniversary of the September 11 attacks to help others in need."

More than 2,700 people were killed on Sept. 11, 2001, when Islamic extremists crashed hijacked airliners into the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon outside Washington. Another airliner crashed in a field in Pennsylvania.

"As a 9/11 family member, I cannot think of a more inspiring, appropriate and constructive tribute to my late brother and all those who perished, were injured or rose in service -- to rekindle at least for one day each year the remarkable spirit of compassion and service that unified our country," says MyGoodDeed.org co-founder and vice president Jay Winuk, whose younger brother Glenn Winuk, an attorney, volunteer firefighter and EMT, died in the line of duty in the collapse of the World Trade Center. "This groundbreaking national service legislation will greatly benefit the nation in so many meaningful ways as we face these challenging times."

Paine and Winuk were among a select group of service sector leaders, government officials and other dignitaries who attended today's ceremony at the SEED School in Washington, to witness Obama signing into law the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act. The new contains other provisions aside from the September 11 designation. In all, the new law will expand national service programs to create 175,000 new service opportunities.

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) both worked closely with the sponsors of the Serve America Act in the Senate and House to draft and include language to establish 9/11 as a National Day of Service and Remembrance, according to MyGoodDeed.org.

"I could not be more proud to work to pass this important provision," says Schumer, who joined with King in first proposing to Congress in 2004 that September 11 should be designated a national day of service. "September 11 should not only be a day for mourning -- it should be a day to think about our neighbors, our community and our country. We can take a tragic day in our nation's history and turn it into a force for good."

Under the new law, the anniversary of September 11 would be observed annually in ways somewhat similar to Martin Luther King Jr. Day, although it intentionally will not be a federal holiday.

"We do not wish to see it ever become a state or federally designated day off," says Paine. "Instead, we hope that individuals, businesses and organizations will be inspired on their own to voluntarily engage in community service, perform good deeds of any nature, and participate in other private and organized activities in remembrance of the events of 9/11."

To support this observance, the new legislation authorizes the Corporation for National and Community Service, which oversees federal national service programs, to make grants and provide other assistance to community nonprofits and other groups that want to organize September 11 service and remembrance activities.

"Our hope is to organize the single largest day of service in U.S. history on the 10th anniversary of 9/11," says Paine, referring to September 11, 2011, just two and a half years away. "Though millions of people already support the MyGoodDeed.org initiative by engaging in charitable service each 9/11, we realize it will take some time to build widespread awareness of this formal observance. We are very are confident, however, that the 9/11 National Day of Service and Remembrance will ultimately play a very significant role in energizing volunteerism in America, while also bringing a sense of national healing to one of the worst human tragedies in U.S. history."

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:



Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

Leahy Would Ensure Those Whose Fraud Led To Economic Meltdown Are 'Held To Account'

The Senate Monday began debate on the bipartisan Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act (FERA), legislation that will increase the tools available to help prosecutors combat fraud, particularly financial fraud which contributed to the current economic crisis.

The bill (S 386) was introduced by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) on Feb. 5. The measure cleared the committee on March 5. The Senate is expected to debate the legislation throughout the week.

“At its core, the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act authorizes the resources necessary for the Justice Department, the FBI, and other investigative agencies to respond to this crisis,” says Leahy. “Only by reinvigorating our anti-fraud measures and giving law enforcement agencies the tools and resources they need to root out fraud can we ensure that fraud can never again place our financial system at risk and victimize so many Americans.”

The Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act will authorize funding and amend federal law to give law enforcement enhanced tools for fighting fraud. More than 60,000 cases of mortgage fraud were reported in 2008, nearly 10 times as many as in 2002, a statement from Leahy's office says. The bill authorizes funding to increase the number of agents from the FBI working on the mortgage fraud task force, increases funding to the Secret Service to combat financial crimes, as well as funding to hire fraud prosecutors for the Department of Justice and FBI.

"This is a bipartisan effort about a shared concern. I believe that this is an effort that should be supported by all Americans," Leahy says. "Whether you supported the economic recovery efforts proposed by President Bush and President Obama, no one wants that money squandered by fraud. Whether you are for helping homeowners now in hard times or think folks who have lost their jobs or were lured into subprime mortgages are now getting what they deserve, no one should want to see those who engaged in mortgage fraud escape accountability."

According to a statement from Leahy's office, the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act would:

Amend the definition of “financial institution” to extend federal fraud laws to mortgage lending businesses not directly regulated or insured by the Federal government

Amend the major fraud statute to protect funds expended under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and the economic stimulus package

Authorize funding to hire fraud prosecutors and investigators at the Department of Justice, the FBI, and other law enforcement agencies, and authorize funding for U.S. Attorneys’ Offices to help staff FBI mortgage fraud task forces.

Amend the federal securities statute to cover fraud schemes involving commodities futures and options

Amend the criminal money laundering statute to make clear that the proceeds of specified unlawful activity include the gross receipts of the illegal activity, and not just the profits of the activity

Improve the False Claims Act to clarify that the act was intended to extend to any false or fraudulent claim for government money or property, whether or not the claim is presented to a government official or employee, whether or not the government has physical custody of the money, and whether or not the defendant specifically intended to defraud the government.

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:


Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

Labor Coalition Calls For New Workplace Law Following Crimes At N.J. Pipe Plant

Responding to the sentencing of the first of four New Jersey executives of the Birmingham, Ala.-based McWane Corp. in federal court, a politically potent labor coalition is urging Congress to make "fundamental changes in the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act" that first created the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) in 1970.

The first four managers were to be sentenced today for workplace violations that caused a worker to die in an accident, only to have the incident covered up.

"Like too many other heartless and negligent employers, McWane managers believed they could kill their workers, lie to inspectors, obstruct federal investigations -- and get away with it," says Eric Frumin, health and safety coordinator for Change to Win, a coalition of seven labor unions representing 6 million workers. "At least for McWane's managers, those days should finally end today."

McWane's former New Jersey Plant Manager John Prisque was convicted in 2006 on six separate counts, with a maximum imprisonment of 41 years. "We hope Mr. Prisque's fate is a warning to all other unscrupulous managers - even with the serious gaps in the OSHA law, you too can suffer severe consequences when you flout the law," says Frumin.

Federal District Court Judge Mary Cooper began sentencing hearings today for Prisque and the three other former McWane managers convicted in 2006 on a total of 31 federal felony counts, including conspiracy, obstruction of justice and multiple violations of the Clean Water Act. The conspiracy charge alone carries a maximum five-year sentence.

"These convictions have also shown how weak the OSHA law really is," says Frumin. "Killing workers and lying to inspectors is still only a misdemeanor under the OSHA law -- compared to serious felonies under the laws used by OSHA, EPA and the Justice Department in this case."

McWane Corp. is one of the world's largest manufacturers of steel pipe. A 2003 Pulitzer Prize-winning investigation of massive OSHA and environmental violations at McWane plants in five states revealed some of the worst examples of criminal employer misconduct in the 35-year history of the OSHAct as well as multiple environmental laws.

The managers and company regularly dumped oil into the Delaware River, concealed serious worker injuries from inspectors and maintained a dangerous workplace that contributed to severe injuries and the death of one employee, Alfred "Alfie" Coxe, according to reports on the case.

The resulting federal investigation sparked a 33-count indictment at McWane's Phillipsburg, N.J., subsidiary Atlantic States Cast Iron Pipe. According to one of the Justice Department's lead prosecutors, McWane was "one of the worst and most persistent violators of our nation's environmental and worker safety laws."

At the time of the verdict, the Justice Department said that "Atlantic States and these defendants committed heinous crimes against workers and New Jersey's environment."

Despite the death, massive worker safety and health violations, and corporate obstruction of the investigation by OSHA, the Justice Department was able to effectively prosecute Atlantic States pipe company and its executives only by using environmental law where applicable, and using general federal criminal law, Change to Win notes. Severe violations involving employer misconduct, worker deaths and severe injuries remain often unpunished, and employers remain unafraid of sanctions due to the lack of any serious deterrent in the OSHAct itself, the labor coalition adds.

Congress will soon consider new legislation to close the severe loopholes in the OSHAct. Hearings on new OSHA legislation are to begin next week.

"We call up on the Congress to quickly take up this legislation, and give OSHA the tools it needs to really hold employers accountable," Frumin says. "Right now, unless there's an environmental problem, OSHA is shooting blanks when it wants to prosecute the really bad actors like McWane and Mr. Prisque."

David Uhlmann, who as chief of the Justice Department's Environmental Crimes Section led the multi-district prosecutions of McWane and its corporate officials, also also urges Congress to address the loopholes in the OSHAct: "Why should prosecutors have to search for felonies under our environmental laws when employers commit knowing violations of the worker safety laws that kill or maim their employees? We need to fix this injustice now."

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:



Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

Human Rights Group Laments ' 'Get-out-of-Jail-Free Card' On Bush-era Interrogations

While applauding President Obama's decision to release several Bush-era memos that authorized the use of interrogation procedures widely considered torture, a leading human rights group is criticizing the Obama decision to foreclose prosecution of those who carried out those acts.

The memos released yesterday by the Justice Department provide the most full and public picture yet of what Obama terms the "dark and painful chapter" that the use of those interrogation practices represents. However, in tandem of the release of those details, the president released a statement saying those intelligence agents and others who carried out those acts would not be prosecuted.

"In releasing these memos, it is our intention to assure those who carried out their duties relying in good faith upon legal advice from the Department of Justice that they will not be subject to prosecution," Obama says in his statement. "The men and women of our intelligence community serve courageously on the front lines of a dangerous world. Their accomplishments are unsung and their names unknown, but because of their sacrifices, every single American is safer. We must protect their identities as vigilantly as they protect our security, and we must provide them with the confidence that they can do their jobs."

However, Amnesty International, one of the rights groups that brought the lawsuits that prompted release of the memos, took issue with Obama's promise of freedom from prosecution.

"The Obama administration's decision to release the remaining U.S. Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel memos relating to the treatment of detainees held in connection with the war on terror is welcome. There can be no accountability in government without transparency," says Larry Cox, Amnesty International executive director. "However, the Department of Justice appears to be offering a get-out-of-jail-free card to individuals who, by U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder's own estimation, were involved in acts of torture."

The memos released yesterday detail such already-public practices as simulated drowning -- known as "waterboarding" -- as well as putting prisoners in confined boxes with insects.

Amnesty International consistently and strongly opposed the Bush administration during the years Bush officials undertook torture in secret against detainees. The organization also supported Obama in the first days of the new president's administration when Obama took action to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and took other steps to end torture.

For his part, Obama reiterated his contention that torture represents a "false choice between our security and our ideals, and that is why these methods of interrogation are already a thing of the past."

Amnesty International also disagrees with Obama's move to put the torture issue to rest in the past by the presidential statement that now it is "time for reflection not retribution."

"The United States has had plenty of time for reflection -- there is very little information in the newly released material that hadn't leaked out long before," Cox says. "[Obama] also said that the United States is a nation of laws. But laws only have meaning if they are enforced. The United States has laws prohibiting torture, and two-thirds of Americans support an investigation into what has been done in their name. That is not seeking to lay blame; that is a call for justice long overdue."

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:



Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

Immigration Reform As Economic Stimulus

With President Obama set to add comprehensive immigration reform to an already-saturated White House agenda, supporters of reform are tying the issue to Obama's cornerstone issue of economic stimulus.

Comprehensive immigration reform which includes a path to legalization for undocumented immigrants would pay for itself in the form of increased wages, buying power, and tax contributions that would benefit all working people, according to the Immigration Policy Center (IPC). The IPC held a meeting this week in Washington to address the matter.

The White House says a new stab at the thorny immigration issue will, at least, begin this year. Obama supports "immigration reform that requires increased border security, that includes immigrants going to the back of the line, learning English, paying a fine," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs says.

President George W. Bush tried to drive a comprehensive immigration plan through Congress, only to see it collapse because conservatives in his own Republican Party balked.

Comprehensive immigration reform would also bring in critical new revenue by integrating more people into the economy as workers, taxpayers, and consumers, IPC says in a statement.

"We know, from experience and analysis, that a legalization program helps grow the economy," says Dan Siciliano, associate dean at Stanford University. "Being undocumented causes immigrants not to invest in themselves, in their community, or their skills. Enfranchised consumers who are part of the above ground economy are more invested consumers. They are more likely to invest extra time, money, and effort into their children and themselves."

The 2007 immigration reform bill, which included a legalization program, would also have more than paid for itself through increased tax revenue, the IPC says. The Congressional Budget Office and congressional Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007, as amended by the Senate through May 24, 2007, would have generated $48 billion in new revenue from 2008 through 2017 from income and payroll taxes, as well as various administrative fees, the organization says in a new report.

This additional revenue would have more than offset the $23 billion in new “direct spending” during 2008-2017 for refundable tax credits, Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, and food stamps for newly eligible immigrants and their families, IPC says.

The extra revenue would have partially offset the $43 billion in new “discretionary spending” on immigration enforcement during the 2008-2017 period, the group's report adds.

Arguing for immigration reform as an economic driver could be smart, given that at a White House briefing earlier this month, Gibbs was asked if the ongoing deep recession would make reform even more difficult to achieve.

"I think the -- what we have to address in terms of dealing with the economy make dealing with -- make adding any number of issues difficult simply by the sheer breadth of what we have to address each day," Gibbs says by way of an answer.

David Dyssegaard Kallick, senior fellow at the Fiscal Policy Institute, also adds that "...people don't just vanish, and imagine what would be involved in driving out 12 million undocumented immigrants. Mass deportation isn't realistic. What is realistic is making sure immigrants work in the above-ground economy. Immigration reform isn't about being pro-immigrant or anti-immigrant -- it's about having an immigration system that functions and addresses what I think everyone recognizes as a broken system."

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:



Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

Teabaggers' 'Facts Are Wrong, Anger Misplaced'

A budget center in Pennsylvania is refuting the claims of those who organized, and participated in, yesterday's conservative, anti-tax "tea party" protests held nationwide.

Protesters say they held the tea parties in the style of the original Revolutionary-era Boston Tea Party, attracting a variety of commentators and journalists from the right, including Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham. They say they the events timed the April 15 annual income-tax deadline to oppose President Obama's economic programs as a cause for higher taxes.

"Tax day protesters are all wet," says Sharon Ward, director of the Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center, one of the state-based centers coordinated by the Washington-based Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. "Their facts are wrong and their anger is misplaced."

Federal tax rates are lower now than they were when Ronald Reagan was president, Ward says. Instead of raising taxes on most Americans, Obama did the opposite through the Making-Work-Pay tax credit. Passed as part of the stimulus package, the credit will reduce taxes for the average American, Ward says.

"President Obama's budget plan would raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans. It appears that the protesters are upset that AIG executives and derivatives traders could have higher tax rates than the rest of us," she says. "I doubt very much that most Americans share their pain."

Those who participated in the "tea party" protests comingled an anti-tax sentiment with general disgruntlement -- and ugliness, according to a published report. Those at a protest near the White House held such signs as "Napolitano -- Obama's Gestapo Queen," "Hang 'Em High Traitors," and a sign held by a young girl saying "Victim of Child Tax Abuse," according to the Washington Post. Napolitano refers to Janet Napolitano, former governor of Arizona and currently secretary of homeland security.

Ward, the Pennsylvania-based budget analyst, says it is conservative economic policies that are to blame for the current economic crisis.

"America tried tax cutting its way to prosperity during the Bush years. Those tax cuts returned very little to the middle class. Instead, they fueled the Wall Street gambling that brought the nation's financial system to the brink of collapse," she says. "The protesters should direct their anger at members of Congress like former Congressman [Dick] Armey [R-Texas], who pushed the deregulation of the financial industry that led to this disaster and made the bank bailout necessary."

An organization headed by Armey, a former House majority leader under the GOP, is said to be an organizing group behind yesterday's protests. Yesterday's protests also appear to have been spurred on as a publicity stunt by the Fox News cable outlet. Several Fox on-air personalities, including anchor Neal Cavuto, emceed the protests across the country.

"Our federal tax dollars keep our families -- our grandparents and our children -- safe and healthy," Ward says. "In 2009, 21 cents of each tax dollar is spent on defense, 21 cents on social security, and 20 cents on health care. All of the nation's safety net programs cost 11 cents of every tax dollar, and we pay 8 cents for interest on the debt. For everything else -- veterans benefits, transportation, medical research, national parks, education -- we pay 18 cents on the dollar.

"It is ironic that most of the Tea Party protests are being held in public places -- public buildings and parks that are maintained and kept safe by tax dollars," Ward adds. "It is our federal taxes that make our democracy-including the Tax Day Tea Party protests -- possible."

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:


Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

Americans Favor New Approach to Cuba: Lift the Travel Ban, Establish Diplomatic Relations

A majority of Americans feel that it is time to try a new approach to Cuba, according to a national poll by WorldPublicOpinion.org. More specifically, the public favors lifting the ban on travel to Cuba for Americans and re-establishing diplomatic relations as well as other changes.

By a wide margin the American public believes that increasing trade and travel will lead Cuba to become more open and democratic rather than having the effect of strengthening the Communist regime.

These are among the findings of a new national poll of Americans on the subject of Cuba policy conducted March 25 - April 6, 2009 among 765 adults (with margin of error of plus or minus 3.7 percentage points).

Time for Changing US Policies

A majority (59 percent) of the American public endorses the view that it is "time to try a new approach to Cuba, because Cuba may be ready for a change." Thirty-nine percent of Americans endorsed the opposing position on this issue, that "the Communist Party is still in control; therefore the US should continue to isolate Cuba."

A clear majority of Democrats (71 percent) favor trying a new approach while Republicans are divided with 52 percent favoring continued isolation and 47 percent favoring a new approach. Independents are also divided (50 percent - new approach, 45 percent continued isolation).

The public, by a large majority, feels that US government leaders should be ready to meet with Cuban leaders. Overall 75 percent of those interviewed feel that US leaders should be willing to meet their Cuban counterparts; only 23 percent feel this is a bad idea. On this issue, partisan groups agree. A majority of Republicans (66 percent), independents (64 percent), and Democrats (86 percent) all have the view that US leaders should be ready to meet with Cuban leaders.

Travel To Cuba


The American public (70 percent) feels that in general Americans should be free to visit Cuba, and only a minority (28 percent) feels that Americans should be prohibited from visiting the island. Freedom for Americans to visit Cuba is broadly supported by Republicans (62 percent), by independents (66 percent), and by Democrats (77 percent). Lifting the prohibition on visiting Cuba would require a change in US policy that has been in place since 1963.

The public by a very large majority approves of this Obama administration policy which relaxed restrictions on travel to Cuba for the purpose of visiting relatives (79% approve, 19% disapprove). Republicans show substantial majority support (71%) even though the policy change is clearly linked in the question and in press treatments to the new Democratic president. Independents (70%) and Democrats (90%) by large margins also support the policy change.


Diplomatic Relations

Americans likewise favor re-establishing diplomatic relations with Cuba by a clear majority - 69 percent favor, only 28 percent are opposed. All partisan groups support re-establishing diplomatic relations, though Democrats do so in larger numbers (82%) than Republicans (57%) or independents (58%).

To understand trends in American opinion, the diplomatic relations question was drawn from a question used by the Gallup organization in 2002, 04, 06, and 08. Over this period, the proportion of Americans which favors re-establishing diplomatic relations with Cuba has increased from 55% (2002, 2004), to 67% in 2006, 61% in 2008 and currently 69%. The Program on International Policy Attitudes asked a quite similar question in 1998 and found that 56% of Americans supported re-establishing relations. Other organizations (CNN, Associated Press) have also reported that a majority of Americans support diplomatic relations with Cuba, and the trend favoring diplomatic relations seems to be increasing.

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:



Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

New Ads Say Carbon Emissions Reductions Equal Big Job Increases

New radio ads are on the air the air in 15 states that follow in a recent trend to link major energy and climate legislation to the lunch-bucket issue of job creation -- instead of environmental concern.

Repower America, a project of the Alliance for Climate Protection, will run the spots to tout the benefits of recently introduced comprehensive energy legislation currently being considered by Congress. Specifically, the ads focus on the potential for clean energy job growth within each state, as well as the importance of reducing carbon pollution and America's dependence on foreign oil. The ads feature state-specific statistics to help illustrate the urgent need for action.

"Let's talk numbers," says the ads' narrator, noting state-specific unemployment and foreclosure statistics, according to an announcement of the ads released by Repower America. "We need to turn things around. And we can't afford to wait. Right now, Congress is debating a clean energy jobs plan that will jumpstart our economy, reduce carbon pollution, and break our dependence on foreign oil."

"If we repower Ohio with clean energy, it will jumpstart our economy, reduce carbon pollution, break our dependence on foreign oil and create 80,000 clean energy jobs in new industries for Ohio workers. That's right, 80,000 new jobs that can't be shipped overseas."

The economic messa ge could be particularly powerful in places like Ohio, which has seen a particularly dramatic drop in employment due to steep declines in traditional manufacturing.

In addition to Ohio, the radio ad is running in both red and blue states: Arkansas, California, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and Virginia.

The new ads come in advance of hearings in the House of Representatives on a draft climate and energy package from House Chairmen Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Edward Markey (D-Mass.). That legislation would control the carbon emissions blamed for global warming; create a national Renewable Energy Standard to mandate use of renewable sources in electricity generation nationwide; launch a national efficiency standard; and support the construction of cleaner American automobiles.

The focus on jobs instead of the environment reportedly is a way to broaden support for clean-energy and climate change proposals, particularly among centrist Democrats.

“It’s deliberate and very smart,” Matt Bennett, vice president for public affairs at The Third Way, a think tank with close ties to centrist Democrats on Capitol Hill, is quoted as saying. “The president understands that the only thing that really resonates with the American people right now is economic recovery and growth.

“This is a big shift in the economy. … If they can frame the debate properly, they can make it happen,” Bennett said.

In introducing the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (ACES), Waxman himself put his emphasis on job-creation rather than environmental stewardship.

"Make no mistake, we have a real opportunity before us to lead the world in a new direction and create jobs. But we have to act now," says Maggie Fox, CEO of the Alliance for Climate Protection. "Passing comprehensive energy legislation that rewards innovation and job-creation, rather than polluters, will jumpstart our economy and create millions of clean energy jobs in manufacturing, trucking, construction and other core industries that are hurting across the Midwest and other states."

Repower America cites a study by Robert Pollin and the University of Massachusetts Political Economy Research Institute found that 2 million American jobs -- in trucking, welding, software engineering, industrial painting, machine tooling and many other industries -- can be created in just two years by driving investment in energy efficiency, clean energy and smart grid technology.

Waxman, particularly, has noted that jobs created by clean energy investments, would be hard to outsource and ship overseas.

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:



Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

This Year, A Democrat Feels Your Tax Pain

Time was in the 1990s that a year wouldn't pass that a conservative Republican wouldn't seize on April 15 in an attempt to channel the collective American pain of Tax Day in the hopes of railing against the oppression of the U.S. tax code and -- usually -- trumpeting the rightness of the flat-tax, or whatever other tax-limiting reform he had up his sleeve.

Fast-forward to 2009, and once again, a member of Congress is using the stress and inconvenience of income-tax filing to push another proposal to abolish the U.S. tax code. The difference is, this time it's a Democrat from Philadelphia and this is no "flat-tax-on-a-postcard" plan.

Rep. Chaka Fattah says his tax alternative would not only save Americans all of the work of filing their income-tax returns, but would save them money -- and pay off the federal debt -- all in one fell swoop.

Fattah wants to do away with federal income tax, and replace it with a with a fee on transactions. In fact, the eighth term congressman calls his transaction fee proposal his "top legislative priority."

"Abandoning the 67,000 page tax code and replacing it with a simple transaction fee would not only stimulate the economy but provide the additional revenues to meet the critical needs of the nation," Fattah says. "The transaction fee legislation will examine this critical area of finding a more cost effective approach towards tax code conformity."

Specifically, Fattah has introduced the Comprehensive Transform America Transaction Fee Act of 2009 (H.R. 1703). The bill would require the Treasury Department to conduct a comprehensive study on the elimination of all income and federal taxes and instead charge individuals and corporations a fee on transactions over $500. Experts who have researched the legislation concur that implementing a fee of less than 1 percent would not only meet current revenue goals but conceivably provide enough additional income to tackle the nation's growing economic concerns, Fattah says.

"We have a national debt that stands at a soaring $11 trillion dollars and grows every day. My plan would work to reduce or eliminate that debt," he says.

The White House Office of Management and Budget estimates Americans will spend 6.4 billion hours and $265 billion this year alone complying with the obligations of a tax code that now contains more than 66,000 pages of rules and regulations amassed over 96 years, Fattah notes.

Fattah says his transaction fee would not only be easier to manage than the curretn tax structure for Americans -- but would be cheaper, too. Americans would pay less under the transaction fee system than they now pay under the current tax structure, Fattah says.

Norman Ornstein, resident scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, which conducts research on government, politics and economics, says of the transaction fee legislation, "Fattah has put out another sweeping tax reform plan that deserves serious consideration."

Fattah says that an analysis he requested from the Congressional Research Service found a fee on transactions could generate enough revenue to replace all current federal taxes and fund programs would serve to revitalize urban and rural areas, provide resources for universal health care and support for an equitable school finance system.

Fattah tried to move his transaction fee plan during the last Congress, and got nowhere. However, Fattah seems to think he can get his legislation noticed by hitching it to President Obama's agenda. Obama last month established a White House task force to examine a possible tax overhaul -- and Fattah offered for consideration his own proposal to transform the costly and confusing code.

In a letter to Obama, Fattah asks the president to direct the Treasury Department to analyze the objectives embodied within H.R. 1703, as helpful in pursuing the goals improving revenue collection while reducing both the national debt and the deficit. The Fattah legislation calls for Treasury to conduct a comprehensive analytical study on the viability of

"Transforming the existing tax code into a simplified alternative is critical to restoring America's economic vitality. The current revenue collection system is the most complicated in the industrialized world," Fattah wrote.

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:



Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

Capitol Idea: Pirates, Progressives, And U.S. Power

By Scott Nance

This weekend's dramatic rescue of the American captain held hostage by pirates off the coast of Somalia stirred pride and happiness within me, both as an American as well as a progressive. I don't see any contradiction there -- actually, I see much overlap from the left and right sides of my brain, so to speak, in my delight in how Richard Phillips will be coming home to Vermont, safe and sound.

Let me be clear: I am not delighting in revenge. I take no joy out of the fact three people, even if they were violent pirates, have lost their lives. Sadly, though, if someone was going to lose their lives -- better the pirates than Phillips, who turned himself over to them just to save his crew.

In the end, I can take pride in the military operation that unfolded off the coast of Africa not just for an outcome in which Phillips and the rest of the crew of the 17,000-ton Maersk Alabama came out of it unharmed -- but in the way it unfolded and in the decisionmaking that led to it.

The rescue of Phillips ought to give all Americans, including progressives, a real sense of pride and confidence in Barack Obama as a commander-in-chief, and that we all ought to continue to be grateful that the U.S. military continues to constitute the greatest armed forces in the world.

Yes, I realize the rescue off the USS Bainbridge was extremely small from a geopolitical standpoint -- and that a change among myriad circumstances could have sent the entire operation south, tainting Obama with perhaps the worst humilation since Jimmy Carter's failed hostage-rescue operation in Iran a generation ago.

That said, past American presidents have pursued operations nearly as small before -- Ronald Reagan's invasion of Grenada leaps immediately to mind -- for purposes not nearly so compelling.

The lead-up to the rescue was mercifully free of any Rambo-like declarations from the White House. To the contrary, Obama seemed nearly hands off from the small-but-dramatic crisis. Yet after it all went down, a top Naval officer plainly said the ultimate orders for the rescue came from the president himself. Indeed, Obama's reported parameters for the use of force -- whether Phillips' life was in immediate danger -- seems so common-sensical and free of any other ideological hoo-hah -- as to be instantly refreshing. Further, the action turned not on some elaborate display of American prowess -- a missile, or fighter-jet -- but something as effective and proportionate as a Navy sniper's bullet.

Perhaps, given that our commander-in-chief is now "no drama Obama," that's all precisely what we ought to expect from now: an effective military sans melodrama. There would be something deeply reassuring in that, I think.

Yes, I know progressives will still have deep disagreements with Obama over his war policy in Afghanistan. I'm under no illusion that Obama's performance in resolving the pirate standoff will erase that discord. Yet I am hopeful that at the least progressives may see operations in Afghanistan carried out in a similarly straightforward, proportionate and "no drama" way that may minimize their worst fears.

Again, I take no pleasure in the loss of life. But I have to admit that as an American, when I first learned the news of the rescue, to a certain grin breaking out on my face that said, "These pirates were immensely stupid if they thought they could get away with messing with the US of A."

It's been far too long since U.S. military leadership was capable of evoking that kind of smile from me.

The publisher of On The Hill and its sister sites, Life, The Universe ... and Politics Live, Scott Nance has covered government and Washington for more than a decade. Capitol Idea is his regular column from Washington.

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:



Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

NEWS ANALYSIS: After Pa. Cops Shooting, Right Plays Make Believe With Guns

Conservatives continue to portray President Obama as eager to press increased restrictions on gun ownership in the United States, even after three police were killed in Pittsburgh by a shooter convinced Obama was poised to ban guns -- and in the face of evidence the White House actually has no interest in the issue.

An organization called the Second Amendment Foundation released a statement this week saying "the gloves are coming off" of the Obama administration and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, less than a week after Richard Poplawski, 23, reportedly opened fire on officers in Pittsburgh because the gunman had been upset about losing his job and feared the Obama administration was poised to ban firearms.

The organization cites comments from Attorney General Eric Holder, but the comments in question involve cracking down on gun trafficking to Mexico, where drug-related violence has flared and caused heightened concern about that violence spilling over onto U.S. side of the border. Further, the Second Amendment Foundation quotes remarks Pelosi made in a television interview, claiming that Pelosi's discussion of gun registration would lead to confiscation.

"The administration and Congressional anti-gunners have declared war on gun rights," says Second Amendment Foundation founder Alan Gottlieb. "The press seems deliberately blind to the statements from Pelosi and Holder, who blame our gun rights for their incompetence in dealing with crime. More than 90 million gun owners haven't hurt anybody, and they are tired of being treated like criminals."

Actually, top Democrats, including Obama and Pelosi, have been remarkably silent on the issue of gun control despite a spate of shootings nationwide over the last month that have claimed 57 lives.

Both Obama and Pelosi released statements following the latest shooting, in Binghamton, N.Y., that left 13 people dead. Those statements each expressed condolences -- but neither statement took the opportunity to use the murders to call for any further gun control measures. Pelosi, particularly, issues press statements that tie current U.S. events to the need to pass various legislation or change policy.

The Obama White House, further, reportedly has told the Justice Department to drop the gun issue. Although as a candidate Obama supported reinstating an assault-weapons ban that lapsed several years ago, that campaign issue has become one of several that has been pushed aside.

By contrast, others -- including Manny Diaz, mayor of Miami and president of the U.S. Conference of Mayors -- have used the string of killings to call for additional crime measures and gun control. A statement by Diaz specifically calls for "quick action on these proposals" by the administration and Congress. But, again, Obama and top Democrats in Washington have not heeded those calls.

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:


Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

Capitol Idea: With Defense Reform, Progressives Shouldn't Be MIA

By Scott Nance

Maybe it's a matter of having become overwhelmed or numbed by the huge amount of activity totaling hundreds of billions of dollars that's already come over the last several weeks from both ends of Pennsylvania Ave., that caused the announcement this week from across the Potomac to go unnoticed. Perhaps it's simply because Congress is away on two weeks of recess.

Whatever the reason, reaction among progressives to news that President Obama's defense chief plans to curtail billions in over-budget, under-required defense programs seems muted at best -- nearly silent at worst. And that's a big mistake for anyone who has serious interest in Pentagon reform.

Dwight Eisenhower first warned the nation in 1961 about the dangers of the "military-industrial complex." It's taken 48 years for Barack Obama and his team to become the first administration since then to do something substantial about it. Defense Secretary Robert Gates' decision to cancel the F-22 fighter jet, futuristic-but-unproven Army combat vehicles and many more big-dollar weapons platforms represents the first significant pruning that military weapons acquisition has seen in decades.

Even President Bill Clinton, after allowing military spending to fall somewhat, proposed big increases at the end of his term that enraged progressives like Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.).

Fast-forward nine years, and progressives appear to have had little to say since Gates' announcement. To be sure, Frank and others offered advice and support prior to Gates unveiling his proposals -- but afterward, they've said very little.

Rather, it's opponents of reform -- even many Democrats -- who are filling the void. Gates says he hopes lawmakers put the need for reform ahead of their "parochial interests," but that's just what members of Congress and others have begun doing. Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.), the powerful chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, appeared to dismiss Gates' proposed cuts, saying that when it comes to weapons programs, "the buck stops with Congress."

Even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who seems to put out a press release to support each and every Obama initiative, has been silent on the Gates defense reform plan.

Indeed, one of the few statements to come from the left came from the machinists labor union, which by actually came out against the F-22 cut. The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) cites the jobs at Lockheed Martin's plant in Georgia and elsewhere as reason for coming out in favor of keeping the F-22 fighter-jet program, that Gates says "was not a close call" to kill.

"The need for long-term air superiority is no less important than the need for short-term economic stimulus," declares IAM Vice President Rich Michalski, who oversees the union's aerospace operations. "The benefits of the F-22 program extend far beyond the aircraft itself. It creates and supports thousands of good-paying jobs when we need them most, and nearly all technological advances in the commercial aviation sector have their genesis in taxpayer-supported military programs like the F-22."

Except former Pentagon official Lawrence Korb said before the Gates announcement that F-22 construction should be halted. The military should buy F-16 Block 60 fighters, two wings of MQ-9 Reaper drones, and 69 F/A-18E/F Super Hornets to maintain U.S. fighter aircraft capability, Korb says.

It's sounds as if the machinists union, too, has become captive to its own "parochial interests," and is trying to wrap those interests in the cloth of national security concern.

If unions and Democrats are going to help stand in the way of this needed procurement reform, that only demonstrates how monumentally difficult it will be to actually end these weapons programs in Congress. Defense reform may make the fight to pass the economic stimulus program and Obama's budget seem like exercises in true bipartisan cooperation by comparison.

With so much inertia within Congress to maintain unneeded programs, it falls on progressives and others who seek cuts to wasteful military spending to exert a massive amount of pressure on the institution to keep the Gates plan on the table.

Progressives and progressive organizations need to start organizing to get out in front, making their voices heard loudly, to help Obama and Gates actually end these programs. Obama has pledged repeatedly that he would go through the federal budget "line by line," ending programs that don't work. With his procurement reform, the president is trying to do just that. It's up to progressives to help Obama keep that commitment.

The publisher of On The Hill and its sister sites, Life, The Universe ... and Politics Live, Scott Nance has covered government and Washington for more than a decade. Capitol Idea is his regular column from Washington.

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:

Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

Expert: Health Reform Will 'Help Everyone'

Echoing the sentiments of President Obama, an expert at a Washington progressive think tank says the U.S. healthcare system must be reformed to cover all if rising costs that threaten the overall American economy are to be contained.

Obama has connected his plan for a massive overhaul of the U.S. healthcare system with fixing the floundering economy. Obama is working with top congressional Democrats in crafting a reform plan, including Sens. Max Baucus of Montana and Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, as well as Reps. Henry Waxman and George Miller of California.

"We need health insurance reform because the fate of our economy is tied directly to what’s happening in health care today," says Peter Harbage, health policy advisor at the Center for American Progress. "We have a situation where families and businesses are all seeing their health care costs skyrocket and we simply can’t be competitive internationally while we let that continue so we need to take a step back and look at some of the key things we can do to make health care better, like bring premiums, insurance premiums under control, like finding better ways to have health information technology create an efficient system. We also need to look at how to help the uninsured. One of the main cost-drivers in the system is that we have so many uninsured people who only get care when they absolutely need it and seek care in the emergency room where it’s the most expensive, so we have to find a way to bring that population in and give them health insurance as well."

Health reform will help all, even those who currently have health coverage, as well as small business owners, Harbage says.

"Health reform is going to help everyone in our society because so much of our economy is tied into health care spending. But let me give you two groups that sometimes come as a surprise who’ll be helped by health reform. The first is those with insurance. There’s somehow this perception that health reform is only about helping the uninsured which something we absolutely have to do," he says in a new online video. "But the reality is that we have such an efficient system, we have a system that involves high administrative costs; we have a system of delivering care that’s made more inefficient by the lack of health information technology that the groups of folks, one of the groups of folks who would be really and truly helped by health care reform are those who already have insurance today, because by creating amore efficient system we can contain costs, we can even bring costs down and we can make it more affordable fro all those working families and all those businesses who are struggling to pay their premiums right now.

"The second group who health reform is really going to help is small business. Right now if you’re self-employed and you own your own business, you pay more and you get less from the health insurance industry than just about anybody else. This is because you’re an individual trying to buy insurance. You don’t have the purchasing power that a large company might have," Harbage says. "And so by moving forward on health reform we’re able to help small business owners and their employees to access the affordable insurance they need and should have just like everyone else so that they can continue to grow and be part of our economy."

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:


Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

Rights Group To Press Bush Investigation; Key Senator Hasn't Given Up On Probe

A high-profile global human rights organization intends to target members of Congress in their districts over the next two weeks to urge lawmakers investigate the U.S. government's abuses in the war on terror and hold accountable those responsible.

Amnesty International says it is calling on President Obama and the U.S. Congress to create an independent and impartial commission to examine the use of torture, indefinite detention, secret renditions and other illegal U.S. counterterrorism policies.

The action comes as Congress will be in recess over the next two weeks, and as a key Democratic senator also wants to move forward with a bipartisan inquiry.

Approximately 133 delegations will have more than 200 meetings across the nation, according to a statement from Amnesty International Participants will connect with their respective members and senators including those from San Diego, Calif.; Tallahassee, Fla.; Danielsville, Ga.; Kaneohe, Hawaii; West Lafayette, Iowa; Salem, Mass.; Ann Arbor, Mich.; and Henderson, Nev.

The in-district lobby week is part of Amnesty International's 100 Days Action, a project to ensure that Obama takes "concrete steps in the first 100 days of his administration to demonstrate a commitment to human rights and the rule of law," the organization says.

Amnesty International has already applauded Obama for his actions to close the Guantanamo Bay detention center in Cuba. Obama, however, has in general resisted calls for a probe into Bush officials, saying he wants to avoid "lawyering up."

Amnesty International's efforts are separate, but dovetail, with Sen. Patrick Leahy's efforts to bring about a similar inquiry. The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Leahy (D-Vt.) says that in contrast to reports circulating on the Internet, he continues his push to establish a nonpartisan “Commission of Inquiry.”

“I am not interested in a panel comprised of partisans intent on advancing partisan conclusions,” Leahy says. “I regret that Senate Republicans have approached this matter to date as partisans. That was not my intent or focus. Indeed, it will take bipartisan support in order to move this forward. I continue to talk about this prospect with others in Congress, and with outside groups and experts. I continue to call on Republicans to recognize that this is not about partisan politics. It is about being honest with ourselves as a country. We need to move forward together.”

Earlier this year, Leahy proposed the establishment of a nonpartisan commission to examine flawed national security policies that led to the torture and mistreatment of detainees, the warrantless wiretapping of Americans, and extraordinary renditions. On March 4, the Judiciary panel heard from a panel of expert witnesses who provided testimony in support of such a review. Leahy says that since he first offered the commission proposal, new facts have emerged that underscore the need for the panel.

Last October, Leahy issued a subpoena authorized by the Judiciary Committee to secure several opinions and memoranda from the office of Legal Counsel, as well as an index of all national security documents at the OLC. The Bush administration largely refused to comply with the subpoena, Leahy says. In early March, the Department of Justice released several memoranda from the Office of Legal Counsel regarding national security policies of the Bush administration that were responsive to his subpoena. These memos include legal opinions that greatly expand presidential authority in disregard of established constitutional rights like the Fourth and First Amendments of the Constitution, Leahy says.

Also in March, press accounts reported on details of a report prepared by the International Committee of the Red Cross about the treatment of detainees in U.S. custody, Leahy notes. The report is purported to conclude based on first-hand accounts from detainees that at least some were tortured while in U.S. custody. Last week it was also reported that Bush administration officials attempted to secure a secret plea agreement from Binyam Mohammed, a British citizen recently released without conviction from Guantanamo, that would have prohibited him from suing the United States over his allegations that he was tortured while in U.S. custody, Leahy notes.

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:



Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

Pa. Lobbyist Sentenced For Destroying Evidence In Congressional Corruption Probe

A partner in a Pennsylvania-based lobbying firm was sentenced yesterday by U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy Jr., to five months of home detention for destroying evidence in connection with a corruption investigation related to former Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.), Justice Department officials say.

Cecelia Grimes, 43, of Parkesburg, Pa., was also sentenced to three years probation and ordered to pay a $3,000 fine, Justice officials say in a statement.

Previously, on July 25, 2008, Grimes pleaded guilty before Judge Kennedy in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. According to the evidence presented in court documents and at the plea hearing, Grimes was a registered lobbyist whose firm submitted requests for appropriations to the office of a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, for "Representative A."

Beginning prior to October 2006, the FBI opened an investigation into certain activities of Representative A, including whether Representative A agreed to support appropriations requests made by Grimes's firm in return for the payment of fees to Grimes's firm by its clients.

Media reports have identified Representative A as Weldon. Weldon served in the House for 20 years and rose to powerful positions -- particularly on the House Armed Services Committee -- before being defeated in the Democratic wave of 2006.

As part of that investigation, on Oct. 16, 2006, FBI agents served Grimes with two grand jury subpoenas after questioning her in relation to the investigation. One subpoena was for her lobbying firm's custodian of records and the other was for the custodian of records of another lobbying firm of which Grimes was the sole proprietor. Both subpoenas were issued on behalf of a grand jury of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

The subpoenas instructed the custodians of records to produce by Oct. 27, 2006, a series of records, including all documents relating to: several of her firm's clients; Representative A; Representative A's campaigns; or Grimes's travel.

Evidence presented at the plea hearing revealed that within six days of the FBI's service of the two grand-jury subpoenas, Grimes placed some documents that she had stored in her house into trash bags, which she then brought to the front of her house for collection as garbage. These documents included items related to Grimes's travel and to Representative A's campaigns. FBI agents retrieved the garbage bags that contained the discarded documents, which were never produced to law enforcement authorities.

Grimes also destroyed e-mails that were stored on her Blackberry device according to information presented at the plea hearing, Justice says. In early November 2006, Grimes placed her Blackberry device in a trash can near a restaurant in southeastern Pennsylvania. Grimes discarded her Blackberry for the purpose of keeping the FBI from reviewing certain of her emails that would be of interest to the FBI, according to the Justice statement.

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:



Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.

Republican Norm Coleman Has Given Up Promised 'Healing Process,' Begala Says

By cotinuing to drag out his protracted electoral challenge against Democrat Al Franken, former Republican senator Norm Coleman is going back on his word, a top Democratic operative charges.

Coleman and Franken continue to duel over a Senate seat from Minnesota five months after voters went to the polls in November 2008. Franken has mounted a variety of legal challenges despite Minnesota officials certifying Franken the winner by a slim 225-vote margin.

Coleman is displaying hypocrisy by doing so, according to Paul Begala, the storied Democratic operative who helped put Bill Clinton in the White House in 1992.

"On election night, Norm had a small lead. He said then that if he were behind, he wouldn't bother with a recount," Begala says in an email from the Democrats' Senate campaign operation. "'I would step back,' he claimed. 'I just think the need for the healing process is so important.'

"But the moment he fell behind is the moment he stopped caring about the 'healing process,'" Begala says. "Al Franken came out ahead after a bipartisan recount that took place in front of live cameras, and Norm decided the best place to nurse his wounds was in court.

"And that's where this election has been stuck ever since, as Coleman's legal team brings one obscure challenge after another," Begala adds.

Minnesota state judges just yesterday handed Coleman a setback in terms of narrowing the absentee ballots available to be reviewed and counted toward potentially changing the outcome of the election. With just 400 ballots in play due to the decision, it becomes unlikely those ballots could swing the vote to Coleman.

Senate Republicans have threatened so-called "World War III" if Democrats attempt to seat Franken before Coleman gives up his options in a court room. Coleman's team has mentioned potentially taking the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, similar to the Bush v. Gore contest in the disputed 2000 presidential election.

Because of the legal wrangling, Minnesotans have had just one sitting senator -- Democrat Amy Klobuchar -- since January, when Coleman's term officially ended. A former television comedian, Franken would be the 59th Democrat in the Senate -- making it easier for President Obama to advance his agenda in Congress.

In his email, Begala urges supporters to sign an online petition calling on Coleman to officially concede.

"How many more recounts does Norm Coleman want? How many more delays? How much longer will the Republican Party hold Minnesota's Senate seat hostage?" Begala asks. "Coleman can end it today and give Minnesota the two Senators it's entitled to. But he's not going to give up unless we convince him to act. So let's speak with one voice and tell Norm Coleman it's time to go."

Watch more breaking news now on our video feed:



Bookmark http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/ and drop back in for more news from the nation's capital.