Think Progress

	GOOD NEWS The Bush administration has abandoned ill-conceived plans to develop "a nuclear 'bunker-buster' warhead." STATE WATCH WASHINGTON: Tom DeLay's strategies move to Washington -- corporation with a vested interest in a controversial development project gives money to the local Republican party, which is then funneled to candidates who support the development. NORTH CAROLINA: U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R-NC) gives up fight against predatory lenders preying on military families. KENTUCKY: The Department of Homeland Security awards Kentucky a grant to keep terrorists from playing bingo or running a charitable game. FLORIDA: U.S. House Resources Committee will consider a compromise deal to allow drilling 125 miles off the Florida's coast "in exchange for giving the [state] Legislature and governor control of waters much closer to shore." BLOG WATCH THINK PROGRESS: HBO's Bill Maher features ThinkProgress video on "criminalization of politics." HUFF POST: Plamegate: Worse than Watergate. BILLMON: 2,000. DEMOCRACY NOW: Listen to a rare 1956 interview with Rosa Parks during the Montgomery bus boycott. DAILY GRILL "I was sort of misconstrued the other day, and I certainly think that if someone has lied to an investigator, of course that is a crime. It is a terrible crime." -- Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), Fox & Friends, 10/25/05 VERSUS "I certainly hope that if there is going to be an indictment that says something happened, that it is an indictment on a crime and not some perjury technicality where they couldn't indict on the crime and so they go to something just to show that their two years of investigation was not a waste of time and taxpayer dollars." -- Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, Meet the Press, 10/23/05 ARCHIVES Progress Report STUDENTS Politics with an Attitude: Everyone from Barack Obama to Stephen Colbert talks to Campus Progress. Right-wingers seem scared of us. Find out why here.

by Judd Legum, Faiz Shakir, Nico Pitney
Amanda Terkel, Payson Schwin and Christy Harvey

IRAQ	The Ultimate Sacrifice
NATIONAL SECURITY	What You Need To Know
STATE WATCH	Tearing Down TABOR
UNDER THE RADAR	Go Beyond The Headlines
For news and updates throughout the day, check out our blog at ThinkProgress.org.
Sign up | Contact us | Permalinks/Archive | Mobile | RSS | Print

IRAQ
The Ultimate Sacrifice

The costs of the war in Iraq -- to our national security, to the global war on terror, to our fiscal stability, and to our nation's reputation -- have been high. But no price is greater than the lives of the U.S. soldiers who volunteered to sacrifice their lives for our safety. Today, the nation pays tribute to the 2,000 service members killed in Iraq since the invasion. "More than 15,220 also have been wounded in combat, including more than 7,100 injured too badly to return to duty," and thousands more "have been hurt in incidents unrelated to combat." Many of the American service members who have fought in Iraq volunteered for the war "because they burned with conviction in the rightness of the mission. Others were driven by powerful loyalty to units and friends. For some it was simply their job." Whatever their reason, their sacrifice has been ultimate, and we honor it today. (Watch this moving interactive photo essay of 27 funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq.)

A SHIFTING MISSION IN IRAQ: In two and a half years, the mission of U.S. soldiers in Iraq has shifted remarkably. Prior to the war, Bush stated, "Our mission is clear in Iraq. Should we have to go in, our mission is very clear: disarmament. And in order to disarm, it would mean regime change. I'm confident we'll be able to achieve that objective, in a way that minimizes the loss of life. No doubt there's risks in any military operation; I know that. But it's very clear what we intend to do. And our mission won't change." But steadily, as the loss of American lives has accelerated, our mission in Iraq has changed and morphed. The rationale Bush used to invade Iraq was to warn the American public about a possible scenario where Iraq could become a training ground for terrorists. In November 2002, Bush said, "[I]magine a terrorist network with Iraq as an arsenal and as a training ground..." The American public no longer has to imagine. Bush himself now concedes, "The terrorists regard Iraq as the central front in their war against humanity" and that "the best way to honor the sacrifice of our fallen troops is to complete the mission."

TWO AND A HALF YEARS AFTER OCCUPATION, ANALYSTS WARN OF CIVIL WAR IN IRAQ: "A week after a historic referendum on a new constitution, Iraq looks much as it did before the vote: Kurdish militias patrol the north, warring Shiite Muslim militias wrestle for control of the south and in the center, an insurgency supported by an angry Sunni Muslim Arab minority battles U.S. forces, the Iraqi government and the Shiites." Former Middle East analyst for the Defense Intelligence Agency, Patrick Lang, said, "Whatever the outcome of the political process, I think the Sunni Arab resistance in Iraq will continue." Many in Iraq see signs that the insurgency is having the effect of "fragmenting [Iraq], not pulling together," eliciting fears of politicians like Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) who warned in October 2002, "what could be worse than Saddam would be a major civil war in the region." Middle East analysts are warning of the possible consequences that may result from a civil war in Iraq. "If it's a war between Sunni and Shiite, this war might be extended from Lebanon to Afghanistan," said Diaa Rashwan, an Egyptian expert on Islamic militancy. Another Egyptian analyst, Mohamed el-Sayed Said, warned that if we have a civil war in Iraq, "it would probably inflame divisions in other countries, particularly Lebanon and Saudi Arabia."

NATIONAL SECURITY
What You Need To Know

Yesterday, special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald appeared to be tightening up some loose ends in the grand jury investigation of the White House's involvement in the leak of an undercover CIA agent. The grand jury, whose term expires Friday, is scheduled for a session today and many expect indictments to be handed down. Target letters were reportedly issued to those facing indictment, with sealed indictments to be filed today and released by the end of the week. Fitzgerald, a prosecutor based in Chicago, was in Washington, D.C. yesterday meeting with Karl Rove's lawyer, Robert Luskin, and his lead FBI investigator, Jack Eckenrode. The meeting with Rove's lawyer suggests that the focus of the leak investigation is shifting back to the White House deputy chief of staff. Meanwhile, Fitzgerald's meeting with the FBI came after agents interviewed at least two people in Valerie Plame's D.C. neighborhood to determine whether they knew she worked for the CIA before her identity was revealed. The Washington Post reported this could be a "possible sign that Fitzgerald may charge one or more officials with illegally disclosing Valerie Plame's CIA affiliation." Whether the indictments are handed down or not, there are some key facts to keep in mind.

ROVE HAS REPEATEDLY DENIED ANY INVOLVEMENT IN LEAK: Asked on Sept. 29, 2003, whether he had "any knowledge" of the leak or whether he leaked the name of the CIA agent, Rove answered "no." He later said, "I didn't know her name. I didn't leak her name." Press Secretary Scott McClellan said he personally spoke to Karl Rove and Scooter Libby so that he could report back to the public that "they were not involved."

BUSH SAID HE WOULD FIRE ANYONE INVOLVED, THEN LOWERED HIS STANDARD: When asked whether he would "fire anyone" who was involved in the leak, Bush said, "Yes. And that's up to the U.S. Attorney to find the facts." Bush earlier said he would "take appropriate action" against leakers. Despite Bush's pledge that, "When the President says something, he better mean it," he later lowered his standard for firing White House staff, saying individuals first had to commit "a crime" before being dismissed.

IT'S ABOUT IRAQ: The personal smear of Joe Wilson was conducted by the White House because his core argument that "intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat" was correct. Wilson's op-ed put into motion a series of politically-damaging events for the administration that revealed how the nation was misled into war. The smear of Wilson was described as an act "meant purely and simply for revenge" and as a "slime and defend" campaign.

WHITE HOUSE SAID IT WOULD BE HAPPY TO COMMENT ONCE INDICTMENTS WERE HANDED DOWN: President Bush and Scott McClellan have repeatedly refused to comment on the facts outlined above. On Monday, for instance, Bush said, "I haven't changed my mind about whether or not I'm going to comment on it publicly." But, on numerous occasions, McClellan has said, "The President believes it's important to let the investigators do their work, and at that point, once they have come to a conclusion, then we will be more than happy to talk about it." Should indictments be handed down, Bush and McClellan should answer questions about the White House's involvement in the leak and what it plans to do about the leakers.

BUSH HAS SAID INVESTIGATION IS BEING CONDUCTED IN DIGNIFIED WAY: If indictments are issued, allies of the White House have announced a strategy "of attacking any criminal charges as a disagreement over legal technicalities or the product of an overzealous prosecutor." Should the right-wing launch such a campaign, it is important to recall that President Bush said, "The special prosecutor is conducting a very serious investigation -- he's doing it in a very dignified way."


STATE WATCH
Tearing Down TABOR

The conservative economic agenda is by now well known: aggressively slash taxes on the wealthy; run up severe budget deficits; then push for strict cuts in critical domestic spending under the guise of fiscal responsibility. One tool designed to advance this agenda is TABOR, a.k.a. the Taxpayers' Bill of Rights, a hodgepodge of "anti-tax" initiatives conceived in the bowels of the conservative Heritage Foundation and made law in Colorado in 1992. TABOR artificially limits revenue and spending for all services, no matter how great the need, by restricting revenue growth "to a highly restrictive formula: inflation plus the annual change in population." (Watch this video for more information.) The result has been a fiscal disaster for Colorado and has led to steep cuts in health, education, public safety, and other programs that invest in middle- and working-class Americans. Six days from now, Colorado voters will finally have a chance to reform TABOR for the better. You can join the effort -- if you have friends or family in Colorado, send a message now reminding them of the high stakes of Tuesday's election.

CLOSE CALL IN COLORADO: The latest polling suggests the outcome of the TABOR referendums is too close to call. Pollster Brad Coker tells the Denver Post, "It could pass. It could fail. You can't really make a call." This close to the election, the most important way to convince undecided voters isn't through advertisements or leaflets, but personal appeals from trusted friends or family members. We've set up a website to help you do just that -- NetworkForProgress.org. (If you don't know anyone in Colorado, you can still help.)

THE HIGH COST OF ANTI-TAX CONSERVATISM: Similar legislation to TABOR is now being considered by at least sixteen other states, and residents of those states are looking to see how Colorado's TABOR experience has been. Here's a taste: Under TABOR, Colorado has declined from 35th to 49th in the nation in K-12 spending as a percentage of personal income. Higher education funding per resident student dropped by 31 percent after adjusting for inflation, while funding as a share of personal income declined from 35th to 48th in the nation. At the same time, tuition has shot through the roof and scores of faculty are being lured away by states that can offer more reasonable salaries. Even Colorado Gov. Bill Owens (R) – who, as a state representative, was one of six Colorado officials who helped push through TABOR in 1992 – now acknowledges that under TABOR, "we cannot take the steps we must take to build a brighter future for all of Colorado, and particularly our children."

CONSERVATIVE FISCAL POLICY UNDERMINES COMPETITIVENESS: Many in Colorado's business community understand the high costs of conservative "anti-tax" doctrine. Neil Westergaard, editor of the Denver Business Journal, says that business leaders "have figured out that no business would survive if it were run like the TABOR faithful say Colorado should be run -- with withering tax support for college and universities, underfunded public schools and a future of crumbling roads and bridges.” Likewise, Brad Young, chairman of the Colorado's Joint Budget Committee and former state representative (R), said the TABOR formula "has an insidious effect where it shrinks government every year, year after year after year after year; it’s never small enough. ... That is not the best way to form public policy.”