| |
 |
| |
|
GOOD NEWS
The House yesterday followed the Senate and voted to repeal a Patriot
Act provision "that grants the Attorney General the authority to
make indefinite interim appointments of U.S. Attorneys, who can then
serve indefinitely without Senate confirmation."
STATE WATCH
TEXAS:
Lawmakers urge the state to follow the lead of other states that have
formally apologized for their roles in slavery.
IOWA:
State Senate approves legislation prohibiting discriminatory practices
based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
FLORIDA:
State is considering legislation that could criminalize stem cell
research.
BLOG WATCH
THINK
PROGRESS: Attorney General Alberto Gonzales says he may "find out"
that attorneys were purged for political reasons.
PAM'S
HOUSE BLEND: Anti-gay, racist e-mails from an army recruiter.
BOB
GEIGER: Will a major Swift Boat donor become a U.S. ambassador this
week?
SUNLIGHT
FOUNDATION: "Citizen journalists find majority of congressional web
sites are not tools for transparency."
DAILY GRILL
"I think if the President would agree for his close advisers in the
White House to testify before Congress under oath, he'd be making a
huge mistake. There is a thing called executive privilege."
-- Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-MS), 3/25/07,
on President Bush invoking executive privilege in the prosecutor purge
VERSUS
"I think they've made a mistake by [invoking executive privilege]. I
think it will damage the credibility. It looks like they are hiding
something, so I think they shouldn't have done it."
-- Lott, 3/24/98,
on President Clinton invoking executive privilege in the Monica
Lewinsky saga
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 Faiz Shakir, Nico Pitney, Amanda Terkel,
Payson Schwin, and Satyam Khanna
MEDIA The Media Know Best
For six years, conservative domination of Washington created a drought
of oversight and accountability. Now, as Congress finally begins to
take action and shed light on the executive branch, establishment
media figures are aghast. In recent weeks, reporters and editorial
boards have repeatedly criticized members of Congress for investigating
the White House or acting as counterweights to President Bush. As
Salon.com's Glenn Greenwald noted, "Journalists are supposed to be, by
definition, eager for investigations of government misconduct. That
is supposed to be their purpose, embedded in their DNA." Yet time
and again, media figures have ignored public opinion data and claimed
that members of Congress risk severe political damage by carrying out
their constitutional oversight responsibilities. Journalists have a critical
responsibility to not be complicit in corruption, government
malfeasance, and possible criminality. They shouldn't be mocking or
criticizing efforts to hold the White House accountable; they should be
furthering them.
MEDIA: AMERICANS DON'T WANT
ACCOUNTABILITY: Speaking about the U.S. attorney scandal last
week, CNBC chief Washington correspondent John Harwood claimed that
"[i]nvestigating the Bush administration is a lot easier than passing
new laws," and cautioned that "[o]ne danger for Democrats is whether
they look too
political in exploiting this." The next day, NBC's Brian Williams
"paraphrased" Harwood's comments, saying, "I can't help but wonder if
the Democrats are finding
it a little easier to investigate than legislate." Time magazine
managing editor Richard Stengel chimed in this weekend. "I am so
uninterested in the Democrats wanting Karl Rove, because
it is so bad for them," he said, ignoring the fact that criticism
of Rove and calls for him to testify have been bipartisan. "[I]t shows
business as usual, tit for tat, vengeance," Stengel said. "That's
not what voters want to see." In fact, public opinion data
shows just the opposite. A USA Today poll conducted this weekend asked,
"Do you think Congress should -- or should not -- investigate the
involvement of White House officials in this matter?" An
overwhelming majority, 72 percent, said it should. Sixty-eight
percent said President Bush and his aides should "Answer all questions"
rather than invoking executive privilege, and an equal number said
Congress should "issue subpoenas to force White House officials to
testify under oath" about the matter. This should come as little
surprise. Last September, prior to the midterm elections, a CNN poll
found that 57
percent of Americans thought it would be a good thing for Congress
to "conduct official investigations into what the Bush administration
has done in the last six years."
MEDIA: THE U.S. ATTORNEY PURGE IS
OVERBLOWN: In mid-January, as early details of the
administration's purge of U.S. attorneys began to trickle out, Time
magazine reporter Jay Carney was already convinced the story was a dud.
"[I]n this case some
liberals are seeing broad partisan conspiracies where none likely
exist," he wrote. To his credit, two months later, Carney acknowledged
he was wrong. But many senior journalists continue to parrot this
line, despite the serious
wrongdoings and potential
illegalities that have since been exposed. This past weekend, CBS
national political correspondent Gloria Borger declared that
members of Congress pursuing the attorney scandal merely "want
to change the subject. ... They don’t want to talk about how
they’re doing on the war in Iraq." MSNBC's Chris Matthews agreed.
"They divide over the war and fund-raising, but this makes it simple. It's
good for fund-raising." A March 22 Washington Post editorial stated
that e-mails released by the Justice Department "for the most part suggest nothing
nefarious in the dismissal process." (As Media Matters noted,
"[W]hile the editorial referred to the 'e-mails that the administration
has released,' it made no mention of the entire category of
communications that the White House has said will not be released.")
Roll Call executive editor Mort Kondracke claimed last week that
there's "not a shred of evidence" that "there was a nefarious reason
involved" in the firings. Weekly Standard executive editor Fred Barnes
agreed: "I'm still waiting to see some evidence of
illegality or wrongdoing." Again, the American public is far ahead
of the establishment media. Fully 58 percent, including 45 percent of
Republicans, "say the ouster of the federal prosecutors was driven by political
concerns."
MEDIA: CONGRESS SHOULDN'T BE MEDDLING
WITH IRAQ POLICY: Earlier this month, the Los Angeles Times
published an editorial titled “Do
we really need a Gen. Pelosi?” attacking the House plan to
set a time line for redeploying U.S.
forces out of Iraq. Much of the editorial was spent arguing why
Congress should voluntarily neuter itself. The Times said that Congress
“must
not limit the president’s ability to maneuver at this critical
juncture,” and that “lawmakers have a duty to let the
president try” his escalation strategy, rather than "meddling in
military strategy." Last Friday, the same day the House voted to
approve the Iraq legislation, the Washington Post editorial board
(which in 2003 called the Iraq war “an operation
essential to American security”) weighed in with an piece
characterizing the House plan as “an
unconditional retreat.” Rep. Dave Obey (D-WI) responded on
the House floor: "[T]he problem we have today is not that we
didn’t listen enough to people like the Washington Post. It’s
that we listened too much.” Indeed, a new Pew Research poll
finds that a "solid majority of Americans say they
want their congressional representative to support [the House] bill calling for a withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq by August 2008.
Nearly six-in-ten (59%) say they would like to see their representative
vote for such legislation." The same poll showed nearly three-quarters
of respondents were frustrated with Congress's current efforts on Iraq,
many because they felt it hasn't had enough of an impact on war policy.
|
Under the Radar
ETHICS -- CONGRESS DEMANDS INFO
LINKING WHITE HOUSE TO CUNNINGHAM PROBE AND ATTORNEY FIRING: Recently, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) questioned on the Senate floor
whether former San Diego-based U.S. attorney Carol Lam was fired
because she was "about to investigate other people who were politically
powerful." Media reports have noted that among Lam's politically
powerful targets were former CIA official Kyle
"Dusty" Foggo and then-House Appropriations Committee Chairman Jerry
Lewis (R-CA). There is evidence to believe that the White
House may have also been on Lam's target list. From her
investigation into former Rep. Duke Cunningham (R-CA), Lam revealed:
the White House
awarded a one-month, $140,000 contract to MZM contractor Mitchell Wade,
who had never previously held a federal contract. Two weeks after Wade
was paid, he used a cashier's check for exactly $140,000 to buy a boat
for a now-imprisoned congressman (Cunningham) at a price that the
congressman had pre-negotiated. Yesterday, House Oversight and
Government Reform Committee Chairman
Henry Waxman (D-CA) wrote a letter to White House Chief of Staff Josh
Bolten demanding "all contracts, subcontracts, and task orders between
MZM, Inc. ... and the Executive
Office of the President." He wrote, "Subsequent investigations have
uncovered serious irregularities, and in some cases criminal conduct,
by MZM employees, members of Congress, and Bush Administration
officials relating to MZM contracts with the federal government. To
date, however, there has been no examination of the circumstances
surrounding MZM's initial federal contract and the role that White
House officials played in the award and execution of the contract."In
the letter, Waxman requests that the administration provide
documents relating to the White House-MZM contracts as soon as
possible, but in no case later than April 6.
SCIENCE -- INVESTIGATION FINDS MORE
FLAWS IN ADULT STEM CELL STUDY TOUTED BY RIGHT WING: A new
investigation has "raised
doubts about pioneering adult stem cell studies, leaving questions
about the much-touted medical potential of these cells." The results of
the original study published in 2002 in the journal Nature suggested
that "adult stem cells offered the same replacement tissue potential as
embryonic without involving the destruction of embryos," but an
investigation conducted by New Scientist magazine found "apparently
duplicated images being used to describe results from different
experiments." "The magazine says the images appear 'flipped
and modified,' first claiming to show adult bone marrow stem cells,
which regularly turn into blood cells, unexpectedly turned into bone.
Then the same images were flipped to claim the same cells had
unexpectedly turned into cartilage." This is not the first time the
study has been questioned. Last month, University of Minnesota
researchers concluded the methods of the study were "significantly
flawed, and that the interpretations based on these data...are
potentially incorrect." Other researchers were unable to duplicate the
study's results, a scientific litmus test for the validity of any
paper. The scientific establishment has long known that adult stem cells hold far less differentiation ability
than their embryonic counterparts, but Bush administration
officials have frequently claimed otherwise.
Last year, Karl Rove claimed that "recent studies" show that
researchers "have
far more promise from adult stem cells than from embryonic stem cells."
But the White House "could not provide the name of a stem cell
researcher who shares Rove's views on the superior promise of adult
stem cells."
ENVIRONMENT -- BUSH ADMINISTRATION
MOVES TO 'GUT' THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT: In what is described
as a "no-holds-barred
end run around one of America's most popular environmental protections,"
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is "maneuvering to
fundamentally weaken" the Endangered Species Act, according to documents
obtained by Salon.com. The strategy would "limit the number of
species that can be protected and curtail the acres of wildlife habitat
to be preserved." As Salon reports, many in the FWS feel the proposed
changes are "not based on 'defensible science.'" Such reports come just
months after the Washington Post reported last fall that senior
political appointees in the Department of the Interior had ignored or
rejected the advice of government scientists at the "behest
of landowners or industry." These complaints were confirmed in a
survey conducted by the Public
Employees for Environmental Responsibility which found that "nearly
half" of FWS employees that work with endangered species reported
"being directed by their superiors to ignore scientific evidence that
would result in recommendations for the protection of species." Under
the leadership of President George W. Bush and Secretary of the
Interior Dirk Kempthorne, a
long-time critic of the Endangered Species Act, the FWS has declared
only 57 species endangered since 2000. In contrast, Bill Clinton
listed 512 species endangered in his 8-year term, and George H. W. Bush
listed 234 species as endangered in his 4-year term. As one FWS
employee stated, "I
have 20 years of federal service in this and this is the worst it has
ever been."
|
|
Think Fast
On Monday morning's "Bill Bennett's Morning in America" radio show, Sen.
John McCain (R-AZ) claimed that the United States "is
beginning to succeed" in Iraq and said that "there are
neighborhoods in Baghdad where you and I could through...today."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) yesterday "dismissed"
any comparison between the Bush administration's prosecutor purge with
the replacement of 93 U.S. attorneys when her husband took office in
1993. "That's a traditional prerogative of an incoming president," she
said, adding that this purge "is part of a long record of trying to upset
the traditional separation of powers."
The U.S. Navy on Tuesday "began its largest demonstration
of force in the Persian Gulf since the 2003 invasion of Iraq,
led by a pair of aircraft carriers and backed by warplanes flying
simulated attack maneuvers off
the coast of Iran.
The maneuvers bring together two strike groups of U.S. warships and
more than 100 U.S. warplanes to conduct simulated air warfare in the
crowded Gulf shipping lanes."
59 percent: Americans who want their congressional
representatives to support a withdrawal of U.S.
forces from Iraq by Aug. 2008. Only 33 percent are opposed.
Thirty-six percent believe escalation will work.
"By the end of the century up to two fifths of the land surface of
the Earth will have a hotter climate unlike anything that
currently exists," according to a new study. "And in the worst
case scenario, the climatic conditions on another 48% of the land
surface will no
longer exist on the planet at all."
"Unfamiliar with the U.S. mortgage market, unable to speak or read
English well and vulnerable to the blandishments of real estate
professionals who told them property values always rise, many immigrants
are struggling to deal with high mortgage payments as their
homes sag in value, making it harder
to escape the loans by selling."
And finally: Is Washington, D.C. no longer the "Hollywood
for ugly people"?
Over the past several years, D.C. has become "increasingly attractive"
to production companies and television executives, with movies such as
"The Good Shepherd" and shows like "Commander in Chief." "The more we
have women
in positions of leadership, the more style we'll have," said Miss
District of Columbia Kate Michael.
|
|