Negotiating New Immigration Standards in New York

Yesterday, New York Governor David Paterson reached an agreement with federal officials in an effort to fortify immigration enforcement in the state. Paterson has historically been a proponent of protecting illegal immigrant rights, and on December 25th, he pardoned 24 immigrants with prior criminal history as to prevent their deportation. After the pardon, Paterson stated that federal immigration laws can “excessively harsh and in need of modernization.” The Secure Communities pact reached with the federal government, however, makes little change in the existing law, used primarily to detain and deport immigrants who are considered a threat to public safety and national security.

Paterson did not achieve a legislative modernization to protect illegal immigrants from unlawful detainment. Instead, the program dictates that fingerprints of everyone booked into a local or county jail be sent to the Homeland Security Department and compared with prints in the agency’s databases. Also, the new pact does not prevent officials from deporting immigrants without a criminal history. Therefore, questions of how to balance civil liberties with homeland security escalating in New York immigration politics, just as Paterson leaves office.

To read more, click below:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/31/nyregion/31secure.html?ref=politics

"The End of Don't Ask Don't Tell: A Few More Steps Left" -- A Time Magazine Article

The Senate successfully repealed the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” law, prohibiting openly gay and lesbian men and women from serving in the American military. “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” was enacted on the belief that allowing homosexuals to serve would jeopardize the cohesion of those serving, ultimately weakening America’s defenses. Many opponents of the law believe this to be untrue, and have adamantly pushed for its repeal, including President Obama, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and chairman of the Joint Chief, Mike Mullen.
While the Senate has voted to repeal it, allowing equality in the military, it has not been fully repealed yet, requiring a letter from Obama, Gates, and Mullen confirming that the military is prepared to for its gays and lesbians to come out. Once this letter has been received by both the House and Senate, it will take an additional sixty days.
In the meantime, many service men and women are waiting to officially come out. However, “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” has not been enforced since October of this year, due to the ruling of U.S. District Court judge, Virginia Phillips stating that it “irreparably injures service members by infringing on their fundamental rights”.
To read more about “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell”, its repeal and the reactions of servicemen men and women and U.S. Congress members, click here: http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,2037943,00.html.

"Long Road for Lawyer Defending the Healthcare Law"

The New York Times article, “Long Road for Defending the Healthcare Law” illuminates Ian Gershengorn’s argument in defense of the Health Care Law. Gershengorn’s legal argument rests on the precedent that Congress is allowed to regulate “activities that substantially affect interstate commerce”, which he believes, insurance does. To read more about Gershengorn and his approach to this case, click here: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/10/health/policy/10lawyer.html?pagewanted=2&_r=2&partner=rss&emc=rss.

The Healthcare Debate Forges On

On Monday, December 13th, Virginia federal judge Henry E. Hudson ruled that the central provision in Obama’s Healthcare law is not constitutional, making him the first judge to formally invalidate a part of the law. The ruling calls into the question the provision of mandatory health insurance for most Americans, and Judge Hudson posits that rendering healthcare a compulsory expense for Americans gives Congress undue authority under the Commerce Clause, and is thus, unconstitutional. In other words, making Americans buy health insurance exceeds the regulatory authority granted to Congress, according to this case.

This specific suit was filed by Virginia’s Republican attorney general, Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II on March 23^rd—the same day that President Obama ratified the health care bill. Well-known for his conservative stances on gay rights, Cuccinelli claims that the case is not about health insurance, but “about liberty.” This sentiment is indeed echoed on his website, where he refers to the suit as “the 21st Century version of the ‘shot heard 'round the world.’”

Thus far, all but one of the 20 attorneys general and governors who filed a similar case in Pensacola, Fla., are Republicans. Cuccinelli chose to file independently in his home state. These legal actions fall keenly along party lines, and reinforce the idea that the lawsuits are as much a political assault as a constitutional one, as the White House contends.

To read more, click below:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/14/health/policy/14health.html?_r=2&ref=policy

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/02/AR2010080205019.html

How to be a Big Citizen

Social entrepreneur Alan Khazei is no stranger to community involvement. He is the co-founder of City Year, and the founder and CEO of Be the Change--both of which are nonprofit organizations committed to encouraging civic participation, while raising awareness about issues like poverty and education in America. Now Khazei has written his first book, entitled Big Citizenship, which is a straightforward invitation to readers to get out and get active in their communities, and across the nation. Indeed, with the subtitle of "How Pragmatic Idealism can Bring out the Best in America", Khazei encourages Americans to imagine ideals that surround citizenship, and to "be the change" they want to see. The book's central message echoes the famous words of John F. Kennedy: "one person can make a difference and every person should try."

Click below to read more about Alan Khazei and the book:

http://www.bigcitizenship.us/

Gas Suspension: Work halted in Faisalabad industries

The work has stopped in Industries of the city due to a forty-eight hour gas suspension by Sui-Gas department. Sui-gas department suspended gas for two days to all industries according to load management plan. Also, industrialists of the city have decided to close their industries only for a day.
To read the full article, click here: www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Politics/15-Nov-2010/Gas-suspension--Work-halted-in-Faisalabad-industris.

Education Key to national progress, says Pakistan's Prime Minister"

On Thursday, Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani of Pakistan explained that the education is the key for the national progress and prosperity. He went on to explain that education is a means to prevent the generation from falling into the hands of terrorists and extremists. He also said that education remained a priority area of the government and the present government has enhanced budgetary allocations for the sector with the objective to enhance literacy rate in the country.

To read the full article, click here: www.thepost.com.pk/Ba_ShortNewsT.aspx?fbshortid=5710&bcatid=14&bstatus=Current&fcatid=14&fstatus=Current

‘Present achievement’

The Pakistann's prime minister, Syed Yousaf Raza Gilani has said that the enhancement of economic activities and access of Pakistani’s products to the European Markets is an important achievement of the present government. He said that the implementation on the policy of trade, instead of foreign aid, will promote Pakistan’s exports and enhance economic activities in the country.

To read the full article, click here: http://www.radio.gov.pk/cms/news_detail.asp?news_id=927

Media urged to promote literacy in society -- Pakistan

On Saturday, one of the UNESCO specialist said that the role of the media should be now changed to promote new ideas for educating the children of the country and he was addressing a forum for the promotion of literacy in Pakistan at a local hotel. The specialist said that the government of Pakistan was internationally committed to achieve the education for all goals but the governments had been decreasing the education budget instead of increasing it. http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010\11\14\story_14-11-2010_pg13_4

Three Laborers Electrocuted in Lahore, Pakistan

On Saturday, eight people, including a woman, were killed in various incidents in the provincial capital. In one incident, three laborers were electrocuted to death while others received severe burns while erecting a wedding tent. In the second incident, two people, including a woman, were crushed to death by a speeding van in the jurisdiction of Kahna police. And another man was knocked down by a speeding car and two unidentified drug addicts were found dead in the area of Bhati Gate police.

To read the full article, clich here: http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010\11\14\story_14-11-2010_pg13_2

"The Transformer"

Foreign Policy has recently published a revealing interview with Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates. Gates is the first Secretary of Defense to retain the position despite the election of a new president with a different party affiliation than the president who appointed the Defense Secretary. Gates is also the only Presidential Cabinet member to be in both Bush’s and Obama’s cabinet. Gates is credited with many accomplishments, including saving $330 billion in cutting 31 defense programs and altering how the U.S. went about envisioning the endgame in Afghanistan. Rather than maintaining the hope of perusing the Herculean task of establishing a stable democracy in Afghanistan with the potential consequence of the U.S. being seen as an “occupier”, Gates’ ambition was to stabilize Afghanistan so that their own security forces were equipped to continue and win the war. Gates, who before being asked by President Obama to remain in his position, made it clear that he would not be remaining in Washington, has proven to be a force of transformation.

To read the full Foreign Policy Article, click here: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/08/16/the_transformer?page=0,0

Money Isn't Everything

A recent NEWSWEEK article analyzed why self-financed campaigns typically don't fair well in elections, despite their abundant cash advantage. While self-financed candidates are lining up to run in higher numbers, it turns out that traditional forms of fundraising can foster more votes on election day. The Civic Initiative is proud to say that Professor Ray La Raja, of the Political Science Department of UMASS Amherst, shared his insights with the well-known newsmag:

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/10/17/why-self-financed-candidates-flop.html

"Obama Pointedly Questioned by Students in India"

President Obama is currently in India, his first stop on his trip in Asia. Here, Obama met with a group of Indian college students from St. Xavier’s, who asked him difficult questions. In answering questions regarding Pakistan and the term “jihad”, Obama chose his words carefully, crafting a diplomatic answer.

Obama will be in India for three days and will then travel to Indonesia, Japan, and South Korea. His trip is an economic mission that also hopes to strengthen ties with democracies in Asia.

To read the full New York Times article, click here: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/08/world/asia/08prexy.html?_r=1&ref=politics

"What Effect did Health-Care Reform Have on Election"

While repealing the health care legislation recently passed is a major priority among some leading Republicans, it does not appear that this was a motivating factor among voters.
To read an article about this, click here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/07/AR2010110705311.html

Election Insight 2010

Check out this comprehensive insight on the 2010 midterms:

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/59739992/Election-Insight

"Poll: Voters Less Pessimistic than 2008, but Unhappier than 2006"

Is this election much different from other elections, as many Tea Party members may claim? In short, no. Compare Obama’s approval rating numbers to those of Clinton’s in 1994. Currently, 45% of voters approve of Obama’s performance, while 54% disapprove. Clinton’s numbers were nearly the same, with 44% approving and 52% disapproving. Compare this to President Bush’s numbers in 2006 (43% approval, 57% disapproval), and the image is clear: voter’s opinion of the presidential action is no better or worse than in other mid-term election years.
What was on voters' minds when they cast their ballot? The economy, with 62% of voters naming it the most important issue. Second on voter’s mind was healthcare, at 19%. With the economy being the number one issue, who did the voters blame for America’s economic position? Thirty-five percent blame Wall St, 29% blame Bush, and 24% blame President Obama. Thus, while most Americans agree that the economy is the area that needs to be most focused on right now, they do not agree on the cause of the economic situation.
To read more about who voted and what motivated and influenced their decisions, click here: http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/11/03/election.poll.wrap/index.html?hpt=C2.

"Election 2010: Polls Show More Voters Consider Themselves Conservative"

The election results and exit polls reveal that conservatives are on the rise. Nationally, the electorate is 9% more conservative than it was on in 2006. However, one explanation for this is that those who are discontent voted, while more moderate voters did not head to the polls this year, and are thus unrepresented.
To read the full Washington Post article, click here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/03/AR2010110305474.html?hpid=topnews.

"Restive Voters Divide Power in Congress as G.O.P. Surges to Control of House"

Republicans made the largest sweep of House races since 1948, securing the majority in picking up at least 60 seats. A sign of voter discontent, the parties have both agreed to endeavor to work together. However, a major point of contention is Obama’s health care law. Representative Boehner, likely to replace Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House, has vowed dismantling the health care reform to be his top priority, while Democrats are sure to protect it. Also up for contentious debate is the Bush-era tax cuts, which are about to expire.
Ms. Pelosi has credited the Democrats with taking action on behalf of the middle class to create jobs and save the country from economic catastrophe. However, Republicans point to the election result as evidence that Americans do not approve of that actions that have been taken.
To read the full New York Times article, click here: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/us/politics/04elect.html?ref=politics.

Election Day

I just voted, which is always a feel good exercise. I am "post-cynical" which means that I was cynical, but have moved beyond it to observe that often, a Cigar is indeed a Cigar. Elections are not ruling class farces nor are they scheduled revolutions, but they do give the country, nationally and locally defined, a chance to express their opinions. Some of those opinions are crazy but we hope the system makes it easy enough for the crazy to talk; but challenging to pass legislation.

Massachusetts has a series of very close elections and has the remote chance of electing three statewide Republicans - Governor, Auditor, and Treasurer. I am going to venture a prediction that they will win two of the three.

What is surprising to me is the magnitude of the Republican lead nationally, and the long running voter discontent.

So I thought I would make some predictions -- no links -- I have been reading election commentary for two days now and pretty much everything has been said. So what follows is a random series of disconnected observations.

-NO ONE predicted that the R's would take over the House just two-years after the Obama election. I said at the time the election was over-interpreted. People were not happy with Bush; the Republicans had been in charge for a while and they wanted a change. Obama was that change. They didn't vote for an ideology.

-Two things were very important in that election. The US elected an African-American President. This now sounds like such a trite observation, but it was historic. Secondly, young voters trended heavily democrat which may have generational effects. Watch who they vote for in this election.

-However, the "youth vote" was also over-interpreted. They made up 18% of the electorate. They made up 17% four years earlier.

-There are a lot of prominent women running on the Republican ticket and they have been treated terribly by the media. "Crazy" and "Whore" are just some of the words used by opponents to describe them. This isn't a defense of Sharron Angle (or to suggest that some candidates do have irrational views -- poorly defended) but why does this kind of double standard go so unnoticed?

-The country is still fairly politicized -- turnout will be high -- but it will be a different group. My guess is that it will tilt older and angrier -- and young people will not make up 18% of the final vote.

-Voter anger is old. This is the third "historic throw the bums out" election in a row. This says not that Obama was wrong -- or the Tea Party on the right track -- but that NO ONE has found a governing formula to address what people are really concerned about.

-Speaking of "governing" if the Republicans, under the influence of Tea, try to repeal Health Care or amend the Constitution or impeach Obama they will prove themselves fools. Obama lost a lot of ground talking about Health Care, an issue that people don't care about all that much, instead of jobs, an issue they do. Republicans appear poised to do the same in reverse. My bet, health care stays but it won't advance much.

-What do Americans want? Well, they don't want the same thing which is a part of the problem. Generally though, an economic based, populist message might work. Obama swung and missed big by not going after bonuses -- his chance to really play the populist card. Some snorting from the Wall Street Journal is surely worth showing some sensitivity to the perception (reality?) that big guys got a better deal. Obama has also done a surprisingly poor job selling his accomplishments. I mentioned health care is here to stay. I will go further -- within the next ten years it will become very popular -- it is a permanent feature of our landscape now -- although it will change and grow in fits and starts.

-Democrats over and underestimate the Tea Party at the same time. The overestimate its unity, but they underestimate the power of the lower taxes/small government/fear of government message to Americans. They simply don't have the power to understand it. The Tea Party will eventually become disappointed (see "no constitutional amendments" and "health care stays" and will lose steam; probably going back to the Republican party or staying at home.

-Republicans underestimate the extent to which a genuine SMALL message is out there. They are way to tight with Corporations and, really, wedded to big government (especially the military) but a lot of the Tea party isn't thrilled with the military, big business, or big government.

-I'm at a loss as to where social issues are in the electorate. My gut feeling is that gay marriage is rapidly becoming a non-issue; gays in the military has been pushed to the podium, but will only give a short speech. Abortion is probably a permanent presence on the stage -- but after that -- what is a social issue anymore? What are "traditional family values" and who is attacking them? Are Republicans going to repeal divorce? Make adultery punishable by stoning? Forbid teen sex? Picking on Christine O'Donnell isn't fair, she has already (probably) cost the R's a senate seat, but should we really keep our hands off the economy -- and ourselves? Republicans have been promising stuff to the Moral Right for years and only throwing the occasional prayer their way. When are they going to figure that out?

-Republicans are going to pick up a lot of seats. I'm guessing 60-65. There is "balance" and "anger" losses. Balance losses -- just getting seats back where they belong after the last two Democratic blow-outs -- are around 30-40. After that it is anger. But it is anti-system anger; not anti-democratic. The democrats just got caught sitting in the "system chair" in our game of musical pissed off.

-I liked this quote -- which goes to show the danger of running against Washington, while trying to get there:

“Part of what’s happened is we’ve had three election cycles where we’ve convinced people that the system sucks,” Democratic consultant Dave Beattie said Monday. “And they truly believe that the system sucks. So we’ve succeeded in convincing people of that, and now we have to live with their anger at being in a political system that sucks.”

-Here is what some folks were saying two years ago. Rothenberg is about right. The New Republic may be, someday, in some world.


Rothenberg:

New Republic:

Every election encourages talk about the bigger picture. What is the bigger picture? More to come on that soon.

"Democrats Pin Hopes on Turnout Effort"

While much of the money in Republican campaigns has be spent on political ads, Democrats have spent it on encouraging voter turn-out. A weakness for the Republican Tea Party candidates is that many are newcomers. This may prove favorable for Democrats. To read how four competitive states are orchestrating Democratic voter mobilization, click here: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/01/democrats-pin-hopes-on-turnout-effort/?ref=politics.

"Boehner Offers G.O.P. for 2010 Version of Change"

Pelosi’s most likely challenger to position as Speaker of the House is Representative Boehner, of Ohio. He has been campaigning in his home state this past weekend, critiquing President Obama, the Democrats, and predicting a big Republican win on Tuesday. To read the full New York Times article, click here: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/01/us/politics/01boehner.html?pagewanted=2&hp

“Pelosi’s National Popularity Plummets as Election Looms”

Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House, has reached her lowest popularity level since being in office. Four years ago, 17% reported having a “strongly” favorable view of Pelosi; 19% reported having a “strongly” unfavorable view of her. Now, only 12% report have “strongly” favorable view of her, while those who hold a “strongly” unfavorable view has more than doubled to 41%. Pelosi is not popular among centrist independents, with 61% viewing her unfavorably.

She is still popular in her district, and is likely to be re-elected. However, her position as Speaker of the House, may not be so secure. Republicans are specifically targeting her in negative add, and due to her unpopularity, democratic candidates are reluctant to be associated or seen with her.

To read the full Washington Post article, click here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/01/AR2010110102259.html

"Groups Push Legal Limits in Advertising"

In light of a recent Supreme Court ruling regarding campaign finance, outside party ads this year are different than in years past. Previously, groups were only allowed to broadcast “issue ads”, now, however, they are allowed to use “express advocacy”, which allows the groups to send a clearer message. The limiting factor for these groups is that 50% of their annual spending cannot be “political”. To combat this, many groups increase their non-political spending after the election. However, while “express advocacy” ads are indisputably political, issue ads can be in a gray area, and thus the I.RS. can make the determining decision. To read this New York Times article, click here: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/18/us/politics/18express.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&ref=politics

"How Tea Partiers Get the Constitution Wrong"

This Newsweek article analyzes the Tea Partiers, Sarah Palin Glenn Beck, and Christine O’Donnell and their (inaccurate) views regarding the Constitution. There are two modes of thought regarding the Constitution: regarding it as a “living document” and originalism. Tea Partiers, as well as conservatives in general, lean toward orginalism in interpreting the Constitution, they frequently misunderstand it. To read more about the Tea Party and interpretations of the Constitution, click here: http://www.newsweek.com/2010/10/17/how-tea-partiers-get-the-constitution-wrong.html

"Encountering Anguish and Anxiety Across America"

This Time magazine article by Joe Klein illuminates the sentiment of the American people regarding their fears of what path the U.S. is going down. Chief among these fears is the economy. People fear that the U.S. has seen its best days, and that those days are gone for good; that the newer generations will not live as well as previous ones; and that China will surpass the United States as an (economic) world leader. The American people are frustrated with the media’s construction of the national conversation. To read the article, which includes links that elaborate on specific issues, click here: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2024065,00.html

"Study: Pakistanis Actually Favor CIA Drone Bombings"

A Professor at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth has recently released the results of his study, conducted with a Pakistani colleague, which indicates that U.S. drone attacks targeting terrorist in the northwest tribal region of Pakistan are seen favorable by residents there. In fact, 70% of those surveyed feel that the Pakistani Military should carryout their own strikes targeting terrorists. The reasons these drone attacks are not seen as negatively as they are sometimes portrayed are multiple. One reason is that the area being targeted has been taken over by terrorists groups who have imposed strict fundamentalist Islamic law, killing those who voice their opposition. Another reason the drones are seen favorably by Pakistani citizens in the area is that the drones are accurate. To read the full article, click here: http://www.aolnews.com/world/article/study-pakistanis-actually-favor-cia-drone-bombings/19666696

"G.O.P. is Poised to Make Gains in Races for Governor"

During this year’s election, much of the focus is centered how many seats the Republican Party will gain in Congress. However, the gubernatorial races this year could have significant and even longer lasting affects. Why? Governors in office during the next two years will have influence over the legislative districts that will be re-evaluated to reflect the 2010 Consensus data. Furthermore, governors affect the implementation of Obama’s healthcare bill and education and economic initiatives. Currently, Democrats hold 26 governorships and Republicans hold 26. This year, 37 states are holding gubernatorial elections, many of which Republicans have a strong chance of winning.

To read the New York Times article, click here: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/11/us/politics/11govs.html?ref=politics

American Politics Newsletter 5/4

The Early Word: Regulatory Rounds
By JANIE LORBER

The Senate will hunker down at 2 p.m. today to reshape legislation designed to overhaul the financial regulatory system, a process that could take at least two weeks.
The changes, proposed by members on both sides of the aisle, may draw some Republican support for what had largely been a Democrat-backed bill. Expect to see amendments proposing to forbid the use of taxpayer money to prop up a company and to stop banks from becoming “too big to fail” in the first place. The Times’s Carl Hulse elaborates.
Democrats may have won a small victory in getting their bill to the floor, but the debate has moved into precarious territory for both parties, explains The Times’s John Harwood.
The main Republican argument that the legislation would not prevent future bailouts fell flat. Going forward, the conversation will revolve around issues with far greater consequences for Wall Street, but far less political appeal: The consumer protection agency; the Volcker rule, which would bar large institutions from certain “proprietary trading” activities; and Senator Blanche Lincoln’s plan to force banks to spin off profitable operations for buying and selling financial “derivatives.”
The debate has swung so far toward regulation that it threatens to outstrip the intentions of the legislation’s principal authors, and complicate the Obama administration’s ability to reel it back in.
Still, several prominent experts argue the bill would do little to avoid the next financial crisis, report The Times’s Binyamin Appelbaum and Sewell Chan.
They say legislation does not address key issues like the instability of capital markets that provide money for lenders or the futures of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Others believe we still don’t understand the disaster well enough to craft legislation to prevent another one.
Politico’s Martin Kady has posted this list of obstacles facing Senator Christopher J. Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut, the chairman of the Banking Committee.
In light of the looming battle, Mr. Dodd canceled plans to attend a fund-raiser Monday for Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat of New York, with financial donors, Politico reports.
Nonproliferation Conference: The 189 signatories to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty gather today in Washington for a monthlong conference aimed at strengthening the agreement and, in particular, pursuing an effort to persuade Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment program.
American officials hope to pre-empt a Mideast arms race by persuading oil-rich countries neighboring Iran to give up the right to make atomic fuel that could be turned into bombs if they are allowed to develop nuclear power.
American Nukes: The Pentagon today will release long-classified statistics about the total size of America’s nuclear arsenal, The Times’s David E. Sanger reports.
Immigration Debate: Many Republican Hispanics are reconsidering their party affiliation after Arizona’s Republican governor signed the country’s toughest illegal immigration legislation, The Wall Street Journal reports.
Health Beat: As many as 20 states will not run federally funded high-risk insurance pools set up by the new health care law for those who are too sick to qualify for insurance between now and 2014 when companies are required to cover them, The Los Angeles Times reported. The group, led largely by Republican officials, are afraid their states will end up sharing the operating costs.
Kaiser Health News summarizes responses around the country.
Daily President: Mr. Obama is back in Washington today after a busy weekend that included an emergency trip to the Gulf Coast, where crude oil continues to gush from an oil well leak 5,000 feet below the water’s surface.
At 4 p.m. today, Mr. Obama will deliver remarks at the Commander in Chief Trophy Presentation with the Naval Academy in the Rose Garden. Then, at 6:45 p.m., he will host a dinner for the Business Council in the State Dining Room.
Out West: California’s Republican gubernatorial candidates faced off in a debate Sunday night. The contest echoes other Republican primaries around the country, revolving around one argument: Which candidate — Meg Whitman, the front-runner and former chief executive of eBay, or Steve Poizner, the state insurance commissioner — is the true conservative.
Midterm News: In Pennsylvania, a slew of challenges to congressional incumbents across the state has made this year’s cycle exceptionally competitive, according to The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
Pelosi Profile: The Washington Post’s Paul Kane examines the role played by Speaker Nancy Pelosi at this point in the midterm election campaigns, when she’s vilified by Republicans and traveling to raise funds to maintain a Democratic majority.
Should Senator Ensign Resign? Senator Tom Harkin, Democrat of Iowa, thinks so, Politico reports.
Gates Speaks: Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates will discuss the challenges of paying for national defense during time of economic difficulties at 12:45 p.m. at the Gaylord National Resort and Convention Center in Maryland.
Iraqis Play Ball: The State Department is sponsoring a baseball camp for Iraqis. The department’s cultural affairs office has brought a group of young baseball players from Iraq to Washington for a weeklong baseball clinic.
Science Bowl: Today is the final day of the Department of Energy’s 20th annual Science Bowl, a competition between 105 regional high school and middle school championship teams from 42 states. The final round begins at 9:15 a.m. at the National Building Museum in Washington with Michelle Obama asking bonus questions at 11:15 a.m




Greenspan Wanted Housing-Bubble Dissent Kept Secret

As top Federal Reserve officials debated whether there was a housing bubble and what to do about it, then-Chairman Alan Greenspan argued that the dissent should be kept secret so that the Fed wouldn't lose control of the debate to people less well-informed than themselves.
"We run the risk, by laying out the pros and cons of a particular argument, of inducing people to join in on the debate, and in this regard it is possible to lose control of a process that only we fully understand," Greenspan said, according to the transcripts of a March 2004 meeting.
At the same meeting, a Federal Reserve bank president from Atlanta, Jack Guynn, warned that "a number of folks are expressing growing concern about potential overbuilding and worrisome speculation in the real estate markets, especially in Florida. Entire condo projects and upscale residential lots are being pre-sold before any construction, with buyers freely admitting that they have no intention of occupying the units or building on the land but rather are counting on 'flipping' the properties--selling them quickly at higher prices."
Had Guynn's warning been heeded and the housing market cooled, the financial collapse of 2008 could have been avoided. But his comment was kept secret until Friday, when the central bank released the transcripts of Federal Open Market Committee meetings for 2004 and CalculatedRisk spotted it. The transcripts for 2005 to the present are still secret.
"The substantial run-up in house prices, which we have followed in Florida and also see in the populous Northeast and West Coast of the United States, may be at least partially attributable to unusually low mortgage rates influenced by our very accommodative policy," Guynn warned.
But when the Fed released contemporaneous minutes of the meeting, the bank downplayed Guynn's concerns.
"Reports from some contacts suggested that speculative forces might be boosting housing demand in some parts of the country, with concomitant effects on prices, suggesting the possibility that house prices might be moving into the high end of the range that could be consistent with fundamentals," reads the minutes, which were released to the public several weeks after the meeting.
Note the qualifiers "might be," "suggesting the possibility," "might be," "could be." In the real world that Guynn described there is nothing whatsoever "consistent with fundamentals" that could explain "buyers freely admitting that they have no intention of occupying the units or building on the land but rather are counting on 'flipping' the properties."
The release of the transcripts comes at a bad time politically for the Federal Reserve, as it works to prevent Congress from authorizing the Government Accountability Office to audit the central bank.
The audit language has already passed the House, despite White House and Fed opposition, and a Senate amendment by Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) is gaining momentum, cosponsored as of Monday morning by ten Republicans and five Democrats.
But the Fed also benefits from the timing. "Transcripts of meetings for an entire year are released to the public with a five-year lag," according the Fed's own policy. Had the transcripts been released on time, they could have influenced the confirmation of Ben Bernanke for a second term as chairman. Meanwhile, the Fed policy of releasing a full year at once deprives the public of transcripts from the first four months of 2005, which are now five years old. A Fed spokeswoman tells HuffPost those transcripts will be available at roughly this time next year.
At the same March meeting, Bernanke said that he had reviewed the transparency policies of foreign central banks and found that other banks were more forthcoming. "It seems to me that we might want to consider the possibility of providing the public with some type of regular financial stability report, perhaps as part of the Monetary Policy Report to the Congress or in some other existing venue or perhaps as a stand-alone document," Bernanke suggested. More than five years later, with Bernanke now chairman, that report has yet to be made public, though the Fed did create an inter-divisional internal working group on financial stability.
Other than the passing mention of speculation, the March minutes imply that the meeting participants had a rosy outlook on the housing bubble. "Activity in the housing market moderated in January and February from its elevated pace in the fourth quarter. Single-family housing starts and permits stepped down, although both measures remained above their average levels of the first three quarters of 2003," the minutes read. "Overall, expenditures were supported by sizable gains in real disposable personal income and increases in household wealth owing to rising home and equity prices. ... Committee members noted that activity in the housing sector, while still quite elevated, had fallen back from its extraordinary pace of late last year."
But there were indications from others that housing prices were getting out of hand. "A second concern is that policy accommodation -- and the expectation that it will persist -- is distorting asset prices. Most of this distortion is deliberate and a desirable effect of the stance of policy," said Federal Reserve Board Vice Chairman Don Kohn, meaning that low interest rates were artificially propping up housing prices. "But as members of the Committee have been pointing out, it's hard to escape the suspicion that at least around the margin some prices and price relationships have gone beyond an economically justified response to easy policy. House prices fall into this category."
The suspicion that Kohn says is hard to escape doesn't appear in the minutes; rather, it only appears in the transcripts that were released on Friday. While the House debated a measure to authorize an audit of the Fed, Kohn personally lobbied against it. He has since announced his resignation.
The president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, Cathy Minehan, also voiced concerns. "New England's rate of inflation, as measured by the Boston CPI, is rising much faster than the nation's, largely because of a 6.3 percent increase in shelter costs versus a year ago. The high price of housing worries many in the region who find that hiring the skilled workers they need in health care, for example, is made even more difficult by high housing costs," she said. While conceding that raising interest rates could come with its own risks, she argued: "I think the costs to us in terms of credibility would be greater if the situation got out of hand on the upside."
Even Tim Geithner, then a vice chairman of the Fed, raised concerns. "[T]he issue has been raised by Vice Chairman Geithner and others that our current policy stance may contribute to potential financial imbalances down the road," then-Vice Chairman Ben Bernanke said, according to the transcript, before dismissing such concerns. ("Imbalance," of course, is a gentle term to describe what the housing crash ultimately wrought.)
Three months later, participants at the June meeting were still concerned. Stephen Oliner, the Fed's associate research director, showed the committee a chart of the growing disparity between home and rent prices, the most obvious indication of a housing bubble. Roger Ferguson, a Fed vice chairman, asked about a footnote in the chart that said the graph had been adjusted to reflect biases in the trends, according to the transcript. Oliner described the adjustments as "technical."
"Had we not adjusted for them, the rent-to-price ratio would have been much lower at the end point. So it would have looked more alarming," he said. Oliner also flipped the housing line upside down so that it's not shooting off into the sky and is instead descending. "I don't want to leave the impression that we think there's a huge housing bubble. We believe a lot of the rise in house prices is rooted in fundamentals. But even after you account for the fundamentals, there's a part of the increase that is hard to explain," said Oliner.
Jeff Lacker, president of the Richmond Federal Reserve Bank, was also curious about the chart. "Just to follow up on what Roger was asking about the panel in chart three on housing valuations. In that panel the relative movement of the two measures is somewhat key to at least the intuitive persuasiveness of the argument that housing might be overvalued," said Lacker. A laugh was then had by Greenspan and the other committee members about the confusing chart.
"You can't trust them to do it right!" Greenspan cracked, according to the transcript. No reference to the chart appears in the June minutes.
Instead, the minutes reflect Greenspan and Bernanke's position that the rise in housing prices was nothing to worry about. Here's what the Fed's minutes told the public: "In housing markets, activity had remained at generally high levels, with only a few signs that rising mortgage rates were beginning to hold down sales and construction. There was evidence in some areas that inventories of unsold homes had risen. Members noted that persisting overall strength in housing might to some extent be a response to expectations of further increases in mortgage rates, implying that a slowdown might be likely later in the year."





Foreign Policy:

At nuclear conference, U.N. scolds Ahmadinejad for defying resolutions
By Colum Lynch, Mary Beth Sheridan and William Branigin

UNITED NATIONS -- The United Nations' top leadership used a high-level nuclear conference Monday to publicly scold Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for his country's defiance of U.N. resolutions, while the United States and its European allies staged a walkout to protest Tehran's nuclear stance.
U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and the chief U.N. nuclear arms watchdog, Yukiya Amano, blamed Ahmadinejad, who listened from the audience, for provoking the diplomatic standoff over Tehran's nuclear program.
The remarks by Ban constituted an extraordinary rebuke of a world leader in the U.N. General Assembly chamber and reflected mounting concern that Tehran's nuclear policy threatens to undermine the review conference of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
"I call on Iran to comply fully with Security Council resolutions and cooperate fully with the International Atomic Energy Agency," Ban said at the opening of the nearly month-long conference. "Let us be clear: The onus is on Iran to clarify the doubts and concerns about its program."
Ban urged the Iranian leader to "engage constructively" in international talks aimed at resolving Iran's nuclear standoff with the U.N. Security Council. He said Tehran should accept a proposal by the IAEA to ship Iran's nuclear fuel abroad in exchange for a more purified form of uranium to power the country's medical research reactor. The plan is backed by the United States, Russia, China and other key powers.
In a rare breach in protocol, Ban left the General Assembly hall for another meeting shortly before Ahmadinejad -- the only head of state to address the nuclear conference -- delivered his speech. When Ahmadinejad took to the podium, he responded directly to Ban.
"The secretary general said that Iran must accept the fuel exchange and that the ball is now in Iran's court," Ahmadinejad said. "Well, I'd like to tell you and inform him as well that we'd accepted that from the start, and I'd like to announce once again that [it is] an accepted deal. Therefore, we have now thrown the ball in the court of those who should accept our proposal and embark on cooperation with us."
Iran has repeatedly said it is willing to discuss the fuel swap, only to reverse course. It has recently engaged in preliminary discussions with Turkey and Brazil on a plan to revive talks on the deal. But the United States and its European partners have expressed skepticism, saying that Iran's latest interest in talks is aimed at stalling a U.S.-backed initiative to impose a fourth round of U.N. sanctions on Tehran. Russia and China have cited Iran's refusal to accept such a deal in justifying their decision to pursue sanctions.
The Iranian leader used his speech to deliver a fiery attack on the United States, saying it introduced nuclear weapons to the world and is fueling the global nuclear arms race. He accused the United States and other nuclear states of manipulating the international arms control system, including the International Atomic Energy Agency, to preserve its nuclear privileges while pressuring non-nuclear states to give up their rights to produce their own nuclear fuel for energy purposes.
"Those who committed the first atomic bombardment are considered to be among the most hated individuals in human history," he said. "Regrettably, the government of the United States has not only used nuclear weapons, but it also continues to threaten to use such weapons against other countries, including Iran."
The IAEA's director general, Amano, made it clear that he is not satisfied with Iran's efforts to resolve the issue. In his address to the General Assembly, Amano echoed Ban's tough approach, criticizing what he described as Iran's lack of cooperation with the agency.
Even before the opening speeches, the conference was shaping up as a showdown between Iran and the United States, with each side jockeying for allies in the escalating dispute over the Islamic Republic's nuclear program.
The New York conference is held every five years to review the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the 40-year-old pact aimed at stopping the spread of nuclear weapons. Technically, Iran is not on the agenda.
But the Obama administration sees the conference as a crucial opportunity to advance ideas to strengthen the fraying treaty, such as punishing nuclear cheaters and further regulating the supply of nuclear fuel.
Iran is expected to block such steps. Any decision by the conference must be reached by consensus.
"This meeting is all about Iran," said a White House official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of diplomatic sensitivity. "Because Iran poses the biggest threat to the survival of the treaty."
The fireworks began with Ahmadinejad's midday speech and were expected to continue with an afternoon address by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Clinton said Sunday that Ahmadinejad would try to divert attention from his nuclear program at a moment when an American-led drive to impose new economic sanctions is picking up steam.
Iran denies that it is building a bomb. But the IAEA censured Iran last year for secretly constructing a nuclear facility and defying U.N. resolutions on uranium enrichment.
Addressing the conference Monday, Amano said the agency remains unable to confirm that all of Iran's nuclear material is being used for peaceful purposes "because Iran has not provided the necessary cooperation." He called on Iran to obey U.N. Security Council resolutions "and clarify activities with a possible military dimension."
Ahmadinejad laughed as he listened to a translation of Amano's remarks.
He later told the gathering, "The sole purpose of nuclear weapons is to annihilate all living beings and to destroy the environment. The nuclear bomb is a fire against humanity rather than a weapon for defense. . . . The possession of nuclear bombs is not a source of pride; their possession is disgusting and harmful."
He added that Iran is not a nation "that needs nuclear bombs for its development and does not regard them as a source of its honor and dignity."
Ahmadinejad also described the issue of nuclear terrorism as "misleading" and "phony," charging that the Obama administration was using it to divert the world's attention from U.S. "noncompliance" with disarmament obligations. He claimed that "major terrorist networks" are supported by "U.S. intelligence agencies" and Israel, but he provided no details or evidence.
Ahmadinejad dismissed the Obama administration's "Nuclear Posture Review" issued last month, heaping scorn on U.S. pledges not to develop new nuclear weapons and not to use existing nuclear arms to attack non-nuclear states that comply with the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
"The United States has never respected any of its commitments," Ahmadinejad charged. "What guarantees are there that it would live up to its commitments?"
In his 35-minute speech, Ahmadinejad called for the suspension of the United States from the IAEA Board of Governors on grounds that it dropped atomic bombs on Japan in World War II and used depleted-uranium shells in the Iraq war. In addition, he demanded "reform" of the 15-member U.N. Security Council, saying its structure was "extremely unfair and inefficient and mainly serves the interests of the nuclear weapons states."
Interviewed Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press," Clinton said, "We're not going to permit Iran to try to change the story from their failure to comply" with Security Council resolutions demanding suspension of Iran's uranium-enrichment activities.
Many analysts see the month-long New York meeting as a major test of Obama's nuclear strategy, which seeks to establish U.S. leadership on arms control to press others to live up to their obligations. Obama recently signed a new arms-reduction treaty with Russia and held a summit on nuclear terrorism.




U.S. envoy arrives for Israeli-Palestinian talks
By Jeffrey Heller

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - U.S. President Barak Obama's Middle East peace envoy arrived in Tel Aviv Monday for expected indirect Israeli-Palestinian talks but Israel voiced doubt about any breakthrough without direct negotiations.
Hours before envoy George Mitchell flew into Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak conferred in Egypt's Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh about the upcoming U.S.-mediated negotiations. Obama's peace efforts received a boost Saturday when Arab states approved four months of "proximity talks," whose expected start in March was delayed by Israel's announcement of a settlement project on occupied land near Jerusalem.
Israeli Defense Ministry strategist Amos Gilad said on Israel Radio the indirect negotiations would begin Wednesday.
It was not immediately clear when the envoy would hold talks with the Palestinian side. The executive committee of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas was scheduled to meet only Saturday to give the formal nod to start the negotiations.
Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Dan Meridor described indirect talks as "a strange affair" after face-to-face peace negotiations stretching back 16 years.
There have been no direct talks for the past 18 months, a period that has included Israel's Gaza war, election of a right-wing Israeli government and entrenched rule in the Gaza Strip by Hamas Islamists opposed to the U.S. peace efforts.
"REAL TALKS"
"I think it is clear to everyone that real talks are direct talks, and I don't think there is a chance of a significant breakthrough until the direct talks begin," Meridor said.
"The talks will be held. The envoy, Mitchell, will talk to us, to them. But the more we hasten to arrive at direct talks, the more we will be able to address the heart of the matter."
Nabil Abu Rdainah, a spokesman for Abbas, said the negotiations would show whether the Israeli government was serious about peace and "test the sincerity" of the Obama administration in pursuing Palestinian statehood.
"The truth is we are not in need of negotiations. We are in need of decisions by the Israeli government. This is the time for decisions more than it is the time for negotiations," Abu Rdainah said.
In an interview published Sunday in the Palestinian newspaper al-Ayyam, Abbas said Obama had given a commitment he would not allow "any provocative measures" by either side.
Abbas has long insisted Israel freeze Jewish settlement building before any negotiations resume, and he had rejected a temporary construction moratorium that Netanyahu ordered in the occupied West Bank last November as insufficient.
Netanyahu, who heads a pro-settler government, has pledged not to curb Israeli home construction in East Jerusalem.
But after angering Washington by announcing a 1,600-home project -- during a visit in March by Vice President Joe Biden -- Israel has not approved new homes for Jews in East Jerusalem, in what some Israeli politicians called a de facto freeze.
Israel captured East Jerusalem along with the West Bank and Gaza Strip in a 1967 war, and considers all of Jerusalem its capital, a claim that is not recognized internationally.
Palestinians want East Jerusalem as the capital of the state they intend to establish in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.




U.S. Releasing Nuclear Data on Its Arsenal
By DAVID E. SANGER

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon on Monday will release long-classified statistics about the total size of America’s nuclear arsenal, part of an effort to make the case that the country is honoring its treaty commitments to shrink its inventory of weapons significantly, senior administration officials said Sunday.
The American initiative will be cast by the White House as a small but significant step toward allowing the world to measure whether President Obama makes good on his promise of reducing American reliance on nuclear defenses. The commitment to make the figures public will be included in a speech that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton will deliver at the opening of a United Nations conference reviewing progress on the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Mrs. Clinton will also announce new funds for the International Atomic Energy Agency.
For years, American intelligence officials have objected to publishing quantitative descriptions of the American nuclear arsenal, concerned that the figures might help terrorist groups calculate the minimum nuclear fuel needed for a weapon. But administration officials said reputable Web sites that track such issues have long noted that American weapons designers need an average of around 4 kilograms of plutonium, or 8.8 pounds.
“It became clear there was a way to get the transparency without revealing any state secrets,” a senior administration official said, declining to speak on the record because the numbers had not yet been declassified.
The numbers will combine three categories of weapons: deployed, in “active reserve” and in inactive storage. They exclude weapons designated for decommissioning. The United States and Russia have already revealed the number of deployed strategic weapons they possess. Britain and France have recently revealed details of their stockpiles. China has said little. India, Pakistan and Israel — which have all refused to sign the treaty — have not revealed numbers.




Opinion Pieces:

Terror in Times Square

That was a close one.
Police and federal agents were still searching last night for suspects in Saturday night's attempted car bombing in the heart of Times Square -- averted when an alert street vendor notified police.
But whether the culprit was an agent of Islamist terrorism or domestic nihilism -- or a deranged lone wolf -- the events on West 45th Street were a frightening reminder that New York City remains smack in the crosshairs of a whole lot of people nursing murderous grudges.
And it was an equally frightening reminder of what officials have long said: Those fighting terrorism need to be lucky every time; terrorists need be lucky but once.
As they very nearly were Saturday.
Said Mayor Bloomberg, "We avoided what could have been a very deadly event." Even a crude, amateurish device like the one in that Nissan Pathfinder -- containing propane tanks, gasoline, fertilizer and firecrackers -- could have caused untold destruction in crowded Times Square on a glorious Saturday night.
Fortunately, the terrorist (terrorists?) -- whatever the motive -- misfired.
Though the fuses had been set, they did not work. Instead, they ignited part of the car's interior, causing a small fire -- which, thankfully, was seen by street vendor Lance Orton.
Orton quickly called it to the attention of mounted Police Officer Wayne Rhatigan, who distinguished himself in his own right: He and two other officers immediately began cordoning off the area as he called for backup.
In the end, several square blocks of Times Square were shut for up to 10 hours -- a difficult and costly decision, but clearly the right one.
Everything proceeded swiftly and calmly. There was no panic, no loss of control. The public cooperated, and cops got to do their jobs.
That's a tribute to New Yorkers -- as well as a likely testament to the fact that such terror scares are becoming a matter of routine in this city.
Still, it's yet another reminder of the need for constant vigilance -- because the terrorist threat, whatever the source, remains ongoing.
Seems New York will be Target No. 1 for the foreseeable future.
Alas.




Geithner and GM tell a whopper UPDATED!
Examiner Editorial


Here's a multiple-choice test that should be of particular interest to taxpayers, professors of business ethics and the fraudulent advertising complaints department at the Federal Trade Commission: Which of the following statements is true?
A. If frogs had wings, they could fly.
B. I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.
C. We have repaid our government loans in full, with interest, five years ahead of schedule.
D. There's gold in them thar hills.
Implausible, perhaps, but yes, if frogs had wings, then it is conceivable they could fly. And if one accepts Mr. Clinton's novel understanding of what the meaning of "is" is, then his familiar statement of denial about his relationship with a White House intern is true. And there is no doubt that somewhere on God's green Earth there are still hills in which there is gold to be found.
Statement C is being repeated daily in a national advertising campaign featuring General Motors Chairman Ed Whitacre. (He is referring to $49.5 billion the Treasury Department gave GM in last year's bailout. In return, Treasury got a 60.8 percent common equity stake in GM, $2.1 billion in preferred stock and $7.1 billion in GM debt.)
Whitacre sounds convincing in a down-home sort of way in the TV spot, but the reality is that this statement is a blatant misrepresentation. And Whitacre knows it. He's probably not worried about that fact, however, because it was endorsed by none other than Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner, who issued a supportive statement saying, "We are encouraged that GM has repaid its debt well ahead of schedule and confident that the company is on a strong path to viability."
Here are the facts, according to Neil Barofsky, inspector general for the Troubled Assets Relief Program. His most recent quarterly report explained that, "the source of funds for these quarterly [debt] payments will be other TARP funds currently held in an escrow account."
In other words, as Reps. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said in a letter to Whitacre, the GM chairman's words come "dangerously close to committing fraud. ... Your false statements may expose GM to millions of dollars in damages, further reducing the value of the taxpayer-owned company. The American people, as the majority shareholders of GM, have a right to know the truth behind the cost of the GM bailout and GM's genuine financial condition." Issa and Jordan are minority members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, chaired by Rep. Edolphus Towns, D-N.Y. The Towns panel should put Whitacre and Geithner under oath and demand to know the facts behind this misrepresentation.




Rethinking oil: An unfolding disaster raises long-term issues
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

As the catastrophe of the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill becomes clearer, the weakness of U.S. energy policy also comes into sharper focus.
Crude oil from the accident, which began with an explosion at a drilling rig off Louisiana April 20, is now pouring into the Gulf of Mexico at an estimated 5,000 barrels a day. The original estimate was 1,000 barrels, which begins to suggest the lack of precise information surrounding the event. Unless some means is found to turn off the flow at the source, one mile down, it is estimated that it could take three months to drill another well to draw off the spurting oil.
Do the math. If the spill goes 100 days, that's a possible 500,000 barrels, or 20 million gallons, of oil in the Gulf, spread on the shores of Louisiana, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi and Texas. In some ways this mess will risk making the 1989 Exxon Valdez accident -- from which the cleanup is still not complete -- look minor.
President Barack Obama got a firsthand briefing Sunday in Louisiana on the spill. The White House's decision last week to put on hold an expansion of offshore drilling until this accident has been studied, isn't good enough. It's apparent from this disaster that, with the state of today's technology, drilling companies know how to turn the oil on underwater, but not how to turn it off. Does America want that risk stretched along its East Coast, too?
The argument that more U.S.-based production is necessary to reduce America's dependence on foreign oil from potentially dodgy sources for strategic reasons may still be valid, but the cost of that approach through offshore drilling just went up exponentially.
Some Americans' opposition to alternative energy sources such as wind power is still alive. See, for example, the eight years of resistance to the $2 billion Cape Cod wind project, the country's first offshore wind farm, which received its final federal approval ironically only last week. Assuming that any battle to reduce America's overall energy consumption is doomed to failure, the Deepwater Horizon disaster has made the choices clearer: a shift to cleaner and sustainable energy is a "must."




Polls:

New Poll: Economic Uplift
By MARJORIE CONNELLY

A growing number of Americans think the economy is improving and three-quarters of them approve of President Obama’s handling of the country’s economy, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.
Forty-one percent said the economy is getting better, up from 33 percent about a month ago, while 15 percent described the economy as deteriorating. Another 43 percent said the economy was staying about the same; but while 7 percent of that segment believe it’s in good shape, the other 35 percent say it’s in bad condition.
Younger and better educated Americans are more likely to describe the economy as on the mend. Sixty-one percent of Democrats said the economy is getting better, but only 16 percent of Republicans and 38 percent of independents agreed.
Overall, the public is evenly divided on their assessment of Mr. Obama’s management of the economy: 48 percent approve and 47 percent disapprove.
And again, there are strong partisan differences. Democrats overwhelmingly approve of the president’s handling of the economy – 77 percent to 19 percent. Republicans, on the other hand, disapprove – 86 percent, while just 11 percent approve.
Independents are divided: Forty-three percent approve and 49 percent disapprove.
The nationwide telephone poll was conducted April 28 to May 2 with 1,079 adults and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points. More results from this survey will be available after 6:30 p.m.

The paranoid style in American politics

This is a classic statement of movements in American politics which are often hard for international observers to grasp.

http://harpers.org/archive/1964/11/0014706

Congressional District Newsletter 4/27/2010

This week we move to the East Coast and Virginia's 2nd congressional district, a district that crosses the Chesapeake Bay on the Eastern Coast of Virginia. This November a freshman Democrat, Glenn Nye, faces a tough challenger in a local Car Dealership owner, Scot Rigell.










Virginia’s 2nd Congressional District

District Background (taken directly from CQPolitics)

Taking in the state’s Atlantic coastline, the 2nd is dominated by Virginia Beach, a center for white-collar military families and retirees. The district takes in parts of Norfolk and Hampton and crosses the Chesapeake Bay inlet to Virginia’s Eastern Shore.

Growth in Virginia Beach slowed in the wake of military base closings and a national recession. The 2005 BRAC round ordered Fort Monroe, in Hampton, closed by 2011, but increases at the 2nd’s other bases and commercial development at Fort Monroe may mean the 2nd will avoid job losses. The 2nd also includes half of largely blue-collar and Democratic-leaning Norfolk (shared with the 3rd). Its naval base, shipbuilding and shipping drive the economy.

Any conservatism here stems more from military and economic issues than from social questions, and the 2nd has followed the growing Democratic trend in Virginia. Barack Obama won the 2008 presidential race here with 50 percent of the vote.

Major Industry
Military, tourism, shipbuilding

Military Bases
Naval Station Norfolk, 51,413 military, 1,975 civilian (2008); Naval Air Station Oceana, 12,000 military, 2,500 civilian; Langley Air Force Base, 7,948 military, 2,100 civilian (2008); Naval Amphibious Base Little Creek, 7,700 military, 1,815 civilian; Naval Air Station Oceana Dam Neck Annex, 3,600 military, 1,300 civilian (2005); Fort Monroe (Army), 1,250 military, 1,680 civilian (2009); Fort Story (Army), 842 military, 71 civilian (2008)

Cities
Virginia Beach, 425,257; Norfolk (pt.), 112,102; Hampton (pt.), 54,753



Electoral History & the 2010 Elections (taken directly from CQPolitics)

Glenn Nye (D), one of three Democrats to win GOP-held seats in Virginia in 2008, will have a tough time holding on in 2010. He’s young and smart and will not be outworked. Still, his job may be even harder than was anticipated several months ago.

The Republicans have a crowded field of contenders who want to take Nye on. Drake, the congresswoman whom Nye ousted last cycle, is not running again, but has thrown her support to Scott Rigell, the wealthy owner of a local car dealership.

Now, with Rigell emerging as clear favorite among Republican candidates, Nye’s re-election bid increasingly bears the marks of a very competitive contest.

As Nye and his party shift to playing defense in a historically challenging midterm election year, CQ Politics changed the race rating for the 2nd District race in early April to Tossup from Leans Democratic. This rating change had been held back because the June 8 Republican primary was so crowded, with six candidates vying. But the general election contest bodes as competitive whoever wins the Republican nomination.

Rigell is the preferred candidate of the National Republican Congressional Committee, the House GOP’s campaign arm. He has the personal and campaign resources and other political assets to run a very competitive race against Nye.

Also competing for the GOP nomination are Ed Maulbeck, a businessman and retired Navy SEAL; Scott Taylor, another retired Navy SEAL; Naval Reserve Capt. Ben Loyola; and editor Jessica Sandlin.

Nye has represented the area in and around Virginia Beach only since 2009. He won the seat by defeating Drake by 5 percentage points in an ideal political year for Democrats.
Democrats have a much less favorable environment to run in this year, and their task is made more difficult because there is no presidential race to entice voters to polls and no big statewide race — neither U.S. senator is up for election in 2010, and Virginia elected its governor in 2009.
In Nye’s district, the House race will top the ballot, and turnout can be expected to be a lot closer to the 2006 level of 173,000 than to the 2008 level of 271,000.

Nye actually received a slightly larger share of the vote than Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama, who edged Republican John McCain in the district by 50 percent to 48 percent. And he does have some major political assets.

Like many of his junior colleagues from politically competitive districts, including freshman Reps. Tom Perriello of Virginia’s 5th and Gerry Connolly of Virginia’s 11th, Nye is well-funded and will not be caught off-guard in the fall campaign.

And it will be difficult for Republicans to portray him as a lockstep adherent of Democratic leaders because his voting record is among the least liberal in the House Democratic Caucus. He voted for the economic stimulus law but bucked his party on the cap-and-trade climate change bill and a Democratic-written health care bill President Obama recently signed into law.

One Republican challenging Nye has opted to run as an independent candidate. Kenny Golden, a former chairman of the Republican Party organization in Virginia Beach, said in a video April 9 on his Facebook page that he is concerned “this primary has already been decided, and it was decided a good while ago.”

Golden was referring to support Rigell has received for his campaign from the NRCC and some GOP luminaries in southeastern Virginia.[2]

The Candidates

For the Democratic Nomination:
· Glenn Nye (D) – Nye grew up in Norfolk and graduated from Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service. He was a Foreign Service officer and served in Afghanistan, Kosovo, and Iraq. He is currently the Chairman of the House Small Businesses Subcommittee on Contracting and Technology.[3]

For the GOP Nomination:
· Scott Rigell (R) – Rigell grew up on Virginia Beach and served in the United States Marine Corps Reserve and graduated with an MBA from Regent University in Virginia. He has been very involved in many community organizations.[4]
· Ed Maulbeck (R) – Maulbeck worked as a carpenter for a few years before enlisting in the armed services, and excelled as a Navy SEAL. He went on to serve the military until he sustained an injury that eventually led to his retirement.[5]
· Scott Taylor (R) – Taylor became a U.S. Navy SEAL at the age of 19 and served for eight years. He owns a real estate brokerage company, a fitness center, and a security consulting firm.[6]
· Ben Loyola (R) – Loyola was born in the United States to a father who mutinied against Fidel Castro’s takeover in Cuba. He served in the U.S. Navy, founded his own engineering service contracting firm, and has been involved in community organizations.[7]
· Jessica Sandlin (R) – Sandlin was born and grew up in Northern Virginia, and graduated from James Madison University for English and secondary education. She has worked as a substitute teacher and for the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).[8]

The Issues

Glenn Nye (D) –
· Tax cuts for small businesses
· Veterans’ rights[9]

Scott Rigell (R) –
· Veterans – Servicemen and women should have access to technology, training, weapons, support and equipment, and veterans should have solid benefits.[10]
· Job Creation – The government should not be bailing out financial institutions. Small businesses should be a priority and benefit from lower taxes and regulation.[11]

Ed Maulbeck (R) –
· Economy – The government should not spend money it doesn’t have, and then work to repay its debts. The administration should not be socializing the economy.[12]
· Unemployment – Illegal immigration is causing a lot of problems for small businesses. The government needs to focus on creating jobs.[13]

Scott Taylor (R) –
· Budget & Government Spending – The government “should cut wasteful spending, improve technology for greater efficiency, reform huge entitlements, and ensure that we fully fund our priorities in national defense.”[14]
· Jobs & Economy – The government should keep taxes low for businesses, keep regulation limited, and offer tax cuts for small businesses.[15]

Ben Loyola (R) –
· Jobs & Economy – “Taxes must be decreased or eliminated, the burden must be lessened, and the red tape must be cut in order for business and our workers to operate freely.” The market must be kept free from government intrusion.[16]
· Limiting Government – “The federal government needs to focus on national defense and criminal justice rather than placing undue burdens on the American citizens and private industry. We must eliminate the growth of the federal government and scale back the size and scope to constitutionally acceptable levels.”[17]

Jessica Sandlin (R) –
· “Fiscal sanity, a climate for free enterprise, smaller government, renewable energy, healthcare costs, education, immigration, and veteran’s issues.”[18]



[1] “Virginia - 2nd District,” CQ Politics - http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=district-2010-VA-02
[2] Ibid.
[3] “About,” Vote Glenn Nye for US Congress - http://www.glennnye.com/
[4] “Scott Rigell’s Biography,” Rigell for Congress Campaign - http://www.scottrigell.com/biography/
[5] “Biography,” Ed Maulbeck for Congress - http://www.edmaulbeck.com/biography.html
[6] “About Scott,” Taylor for Congress - http://www.scotttaylorforcongress.com/about/
[7] “About Ben Loyola,” Ben Loyola for Congress - http://www.benloyola.com/about/ben/
[8] “Meet Jessica,” Jessica Sandlin for Congress - http://sandlinforcongress.com/meet-jessica
[9] “About,” Vote Glenn Nye for US Congress - http://www.glennnye.com/
[10] “Veterans,” Rigell for Congress Campaign - http://www.scottrigell.com/topics/?topicId=25
[11] “Job Creation,” Rigell for Congress Campaign - http://www.scottrigell.com/topics/?topicId=15
[12] “Economy,” Ed Maulbeck for Congress - http://www.edmaulbeck.com/economy.html
[13] “Unemployment,” Ed Maulbeck for Congress - http://www.edmaulbeck.com/unemployment.html
[14] “On the Issues,” Taylor for Congress - http://www.scotttaylorforcongress.com/on-the-issues/
[15] Ibid.
[16] “Jobs and the Economy,” Ben Loyola for Congress - http://www.benloyola.com/issues/economy/
[17] “Limiting Government,” Ben Loyola for Congress - http://www.benloyola.com/issues/government/
[18] “Visit HOME,” Jessica Sandlin for Congress - http://sandlinforcongress.com/

Tea Party Article

Here is a link to an article by Forbes magazine's Bruce Bartlett on the Tea Party Movement in American Politics. This article beats up the tea party a bit, but also provides some good information clearing up myths about tax burdens in America.

http://www.forbes.com/2010/03/18/tea-party-ignorant-taxes-opinions-columnists-bruce-bartlett_2.html

If you found this article to your liking, here is a link to Bartlett's homepage on the Forbes Magazine website, and has links to all of the articles Bartlett has written recently.

http://search.forbes.com/search/colArchiveSearch?author=bruce+and+bartlett&aname=Bruce+Bartlett

Congressional Newsletter

This week we look at Michigan's 1st congressional district. Democrats dominate local politics in this district, but a majority of citizens are also strong social conservatives, and very pro gun rights:




Michigan’s 1st Congressional District

Background (from CQPolitics):

Beginning along the Saginaw Bay shore, the 1st stretches 25,000 square miles from Michigan’s northern Lower Peninsula to take in the entire Upper Peninsula (U.P.). Full of rolling, forested hills, the rural 1st encompasses 44 percent of Michigan’s land mass, but did not contain a single city with more than 20,000 residents at the time of the 2000 census.

Tourism is a major economic engine in the 1st, and many down-state residents head north to ski, hunt and fish. Touching three of the Great Lakes, the 1st has more freshwater shoreline than any other district in the continental United States. Mackinac Island, known for its prohibition on cars, its Victorian-style lake houses and its fudge, is a popular destination. Isle Royale, the state’s northernmost outpost, plays host to wolves, elk and backpackers.

Self-proclaimed “Yoopers” from the U.P. are connected to the rest of the district in Northern Michigan only by the Mackinac Bridge. Despite being Michiganders, Yoopers, isolated from the rest of their state, tend to identify culturally with nearby Wisconsinites or Canadians. Although logging remains important, nearly tapped-out resources in the existing mining industry now provide only modest incomes for district residents. Keweenaw County, once a booming copper mining center at the northern tip of the U.P., now has the highest unemployment rate in the state.

The district has suffered from recent national economic downturns, the continuing auto industry decline and steady population loss. Housing markets have crashed in Lower Peninsula lakefront towns such as Petoskey, Torch Lake and Charlevoix, established beach resort and second-home havens for residents of the state and visitors from across the upper Midwest.

There is a strong current of social conservatism in the 1st, particularly with regard to gun rights, although Democrats still dominate local politics. Democrat Barack Obama eked out a 2-percentage-point victory here in the 2008 presidential election.[1]

Electoral History & the 2010 Elections (from CQPolitics)

Bart Stupak’s image as a center-right Democrat helped him build a long House career in northern Michigan’s conservative-leaning 1st District — and his decision not to run for re-election hampers Democrats’ prospects for holding onto the seat. CQ Politics’ rating on the 1st District race, at Safe Democratic prior to Stupak’s April 9 retirement announcement, now rates the 1st District race a Tossup.

Since first winning the seat in 1992, Stupak has been re-elected by comfortable margins by voters in the vast district, which takes in all of the largely rural Upper Peninsula and a sizable chunk of the Lower Peninsula inland from the coast of Lake Huron. The swing district, which has a history of favoring moderates from both parties, narrowly went for Barack Obama as the 2008 Democratic presidential nominee, but a backlash against Democratic leadership at the state and national levels has given Republicans momentum in what’s expected to be a hard-fought contest for the open seat.
Stupak’s decision came shortly after he had played a highly visible role — and had become the target of attacks from both ends of the ideological spectrum — in the climactic debates that preceded the enactment of the sweeping legislation to overhaul the nation’s health care system.

Activists on the left first assailed him for leading a bloc that demanded language barring any federal money from being used to obtain an abortion. Then conservatives, some of whom had hailed Stupak as a hero for his stand, turned on him after he brokered a compromise and cast a crucial vote in favor of final passage of the legislation, a major policy and political priority for President Obama and the leaders of the congressional Democratic majority. “Tea Party” activists launched an ad campaign against him and held rallies in his district.

There’s already a Democrat in the race who had been ready to challenge Stupak from the left in the Aug. 3 primary: former Charlevoix County Commissioner Connie Saltonstall, who has the backing of NARAL Pro-Choice America, Planned Parenthood and National Organization of Women. She has raised nearly $100,000 on the Democratic fundraising site Act Blue.

But Bill Ballenger, publisher of Inside Michigan Politics, said Democrats “better come up with somebody who is pro-life” if they hope to win in Stupak’s socially conservative district.

Among the names circulating in Michigan are those of Michael Prusi, the state Senate’s Democratic leader, and state Rep. Jeff Mayes. Ballenger said Prusi as “ideally positioned” to defend the seat for the Democratic Party. Former state Rep. Don Koivisto, who now heads the state Agriculture Department, also could make a credible run, he said.

Democrats also are looking at state Reps. Gary McDowell, Mike Lahti, Judy Nerat and Steve Lindberg as possible contenders.

Some rookie Republican candidates were already running, and now that there’s no incumbent to try to topple, more seasoned GOP officials are expected to consider the race.

The leader among Republicans who’ve already declared is surgeon Dan Benishek, who enjoyed a fundraising surge after Stupak’s health care vote.

State Sen. Jason Allen, who is term-limited this year, and former state Rep. Tom Casperson would be serious GOP contenders should they choose to run. Casperson, who is running for the state Senate, lost to Stupak in 2008, but had been a strong vote-getter in statehouse races, Ballenger said.

Former state Rep. Scott Shackleton could be another strong candidate for the GOP in a district that favored Obama over Republican John McCain by 50 percent to 48 percent, but before that gave Republican George W. Bush 53 percent of its votes in each of the prior two presidential elections.[2]

[1] “Politics in America District Profile,” CQPolitics - http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=district-2010-MI-01
[2] “Michigan – 1st District,” CQPolitics - http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=district-2010-MI-01