By Steven Milloy
FOXNews.com
As reported on JunkScience.com on Thursday…
The New York Times reported on Thursday, January 29 that:
“…the capital flew into a bit of a tizzy when, on his first full day in the White House, President Obama was photographed in the Oval Office without his suit jacket. There was, however, a logical explanation: Mr. Obama, who hates the cold, had cranked up the thermostat.
“He’s from Hawaii, O.K.?” said Mr. Obama’s senior adviser, David Axelrod, who occupies the small but strategically located office next door to his boss. “He likes it warm. You could grow orchids in there.”
Could this be the same Barack Obama who said last May that:
“We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times… and then just expect that other countries are going to say ‘OK.’ … That’s not leadership. That’s not going to happen.”
And could this be the same Barack Obama who is looking to sign a stimulus bill that would spend billions of dollars installing millions of “smart meters” that would enable your power company to prevent you from being as comfortable as he is on hot and cold days?
While our new president is warm-and-toasty in the Oval Office, is he considering the plight of Michigan’s Marvin Schur, a 93-year World War II veteran, who was recently found frozen to death courtesy of a malfunctioning electricity “limiter” device installed by his power company?
Change has come to Washington. Elitism is dead. Long live elitism.
Steven Milloy publishes JunkScience.com and manages the Free Enterprise Action Fund. He is a junk science expert, and an adjunct scholar at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
Sphere: Related Content
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Friday, January 30, 2009
Maryland GOP wins election as RNC chair
This is the best coverage I've seen of the RNC Chairs race today. Here's a wrap up from the Detroit Free Press. - Ed.
By TODD SPANGLER
Detroit Free Press
UPDATED AT 4:13 p.m.
WASHINGTON - Michael Steele, the first African American elected to statewide office in the state of Maryland, wins election as chairman of the Republican National Committee.
A former lieutenant governor in Maryland, Steele beat South Carolina GOP chairman Katon Dawson 91 to 77.
He replaces Mike Duncan, who dropped out of the balloting earlier today.
UPDATED AT 3:53 p.m.
Michigan GOP chairman Saul Anuzis dropped out of the race for Republican National Committee chairman for the best of reasons.
"Can't win," he said. "I know how to count."
It leaves two candidates for the job: Michael Steele, the first African American to win statewide office in Maryland as lieutenant governor, and South Carolina GOP chair Katon Dawson who once belonged to an all-white country club.
The race was headed into a sixth ballot with 85 votes needed to win. On the fifth ballot, Steele led Dawson, 79 to 69. Anuzis was third with 20 and dropped out without endorsing either of the remaining candidates.
He said he'll work with whoever gets elected and has no plans to take a position with the winner.
"I"ll move on," said Anuzis, who steps down as Michigan's Republican Party chair next month.
UPDATED AT 3:48 p.m.
Michigan GOP chair Saul Anuzis drops out of race to be Republican National Committee chairman.
That leaves South Carolina's Katon Dawson and Maryland's Mike Steele 79 to 69 with 85 votes needed to win. Anuzis had 20.
UPDATED AT 3:18 p.m.
Ohio's Ken Blackwell, one of two African Americans in the race to become the next chairman of the Republican National Committee, dropped out after the fourth ballot and threw his weight behind the other, Maryland's Michael Steele.
Michigan's Saul Anuzis and South Carolina's Katon Dawson remain the other candidates in the race going into the fifth ballot.
UPDATED AT 3:00 p.m.
With the departure of current chair Mike Duncan from the race, South Carolina GOP chair Katon Dawson has taken the lead to become the next head of the Republican National Committee.
In the fourth round of balloting, Dawson took a 62-to-60 lead over Maryland's Michael Steele. Michigan GOP chairman Saul Anuzis was third with 31 votes.
Ohio's Ken Blackwell was fourth with 15 votes. To win, one of the candidates must get 85 votes.
Even though Anuzis remained well behind the others, his numbers did improve with the departure of Duncan from the race. Should his and Steele's forces come behind one or the other, they could propel their candidate to the chairmanship.
The contest is largely about change, with Duncan being criticized in some quarters for losses in congressional races and the presidency. Meanwhile, race has also played a role. Dawson was once a member of an all-white country club. Steele, a former lieutenant governor in Maryland, is African American. Sphere: Related Content
By TODD SPANGLER
Detroit Free Press
UPDATED AT 4:13 p.m.
WASHINGTON - Michael Steele, the first African American elected to statewide office in the state of Maryland, wins election as chairman of the Republican National Committee.
A former lieutenant governor in Maryland, Steele beat South Carolina GOP chairman Katon Dawson 91 to 77.
He replaces Mike Duncan, who dropped out of the balloting earlier today.
UPDATED AT 3:53 p.m.
Michigan GOP chairman Saul Anuzis dropped out of the race for Republican National Committee chairman for the best of reasons.
"Can't win," he said. "I know how to count."
It leaves two candidates for the job: Michael Steele, the first African American to win statewide office in Maryland as lieutenant governor, and South Carolina GOP chair Katon Dawson who once belonged to an all-white country club.
The race was headed into a sixth ballot with 85 votes needed to win. On the fifth ballot, Steele led Dawson, 79 to 69. Anuzis was third with 20 and dropped out without endorsing either of the remaining candidates.
He said he'll work with whoever gets elected and has no plans to take a position with the winner.
"I"ll move on," said Anuzis, who steps down as Michigan's Republican Party chair next month.
UPDATED AT 3:48 p.m.
Michigan GOP chair Saul Anuzis drops out of race to be Republican National Committee chairman.
That leaves South Carolina's Katon Dawson and Maryland's Mike Steele 79 to 69 with 85 votes needed to win. Anuzis had 20.
UPDATED AT 3:18 p.m.
Ohio's Ken Blackwell, one of two African Americans in the race to become the next chairman of the Republican National Committee, dropped out after the fourth ballot and threw his weight behind the other, Maryland's Michael Steele.
Michigan's Saul Anuzis and South Carolina's Katon Dawson remain the other candidates in the race going into the fifth ballot.
UPDATED AT 3:00 p.m.
With the departure of current chair Mike Duncan from the race, South Carolina GOP chair Katon Dawson has taken the lead to become the next head of the Republican National Committee.
In the fourth round of balloting, Dawson took a 62-to-60 lead over Maryland's Michael Steele. Michigan GOP chairman Saul Anuzis was third with 31 votes.
Ohio's Ken Blackwell was fourth with 15 votes. To win, one of the candidates must get 85 votes.
Even though Anuzis remained well behind the others, his numbers did improve with the departure of Duncan from the race. Should his and Steele's forces come behind one or the other, they could propel their candidate to the chairmanship.
The contest is largely about change, with Duncan being criticized in some quarters for losses in congressional races and the presidency. Meanwhile, race has also played a role. Dawson was once a member of an all-white country club. Steele, a former lieutenant governor in Maryland, is African American. Sphere: Related Content
RNC chairman Duncan abandons re-election bid
Even though this doesn't have anything to do with President Obama per se, I felt obliged to include it due to it's importance on the Presidential political process. - Ed.
By LIZ SIDOTI,
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON – Mike Duncan, former President George W. Bush's hand-picked national party chairman, abandoned his re-election bid Friday after his support steadily erode over three rounds of balloting, ensuring a fresh face at the beleaguered GOP's helm.
"Obviously the winds of change are blowing," Duncan said as he withdrew from the race and got a standing ovation. The Kentucky Republican thanked Bush and said of his two-year tenure: "It truly has been the highlight of my life."
The move scrambled a field now down to four as the Republican National Committee moved ahead with a fourth round of balloting, with candidates seeking to reach the 85-vote majority threshold to become the new chairman. Whoever wins will inherit a party trying to recover after crushing defeats in back-to-back elections that saw Democrats take control of Congress and the White House.
Duncan dropped out without endorsing a candidate.
After three rounds, former Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele and South Carolina GOP Chairman Katon Dawson had momentum on their side, having gained votes with each tally. Michigan GOP Chairman Saul Anuzis' support was holding steady, while former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell was trailing.
Thus far, only Duncan has dropped out and thrown his support behind another, though behind-the-scenes negotiations among aides to all the candidates were in full swing. The field is expected to narrow further the more rounds of voting there are, and that means seemingly anyone could end up with a majority.
The results of the first three rounds boded poorly for Duncan, whose lost votes at every turn while Steele and Dawson gained. From the start of the voting, the majority of the RNC cast votes that indicate members want a new direction under a fresh leader, rather than a chairman who is linked to the unpopular former president. Sphere: Related Content
By LIZ SIDOTI,
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON – Mike Duncan, former President George W. Bush's hand-picked national party chairman, abandoned his re-election bid Friday after his support steadily erode over three rounds of balloting, ensuring a fresh face at the beleaguered GOP's helm.
"Obviously the winds of change are blowing," Duncan said as he withdrew from the race and got a standing ovation. The Kentucky Republican thanked Bush and said of his two-year tenure: "It truly has been the highlight of my life."
The move scrambled a field now down to four as the Republican National Committee moved ahead with a fourth round of balloting, with candidates seeking to reach the 85-vote majority threshold to become the new chairman. Whoever wins will inherit a party trying to recover after crushing defeats in back-to-back elections that saw Democrats take control of Congress and the White House.
Duncan dropped out without endorsing a candidate.
After three rounds, former Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele and South Carolina GOP Chairman Katon Dawson had momentum on their side, having gained votes with each tally. Michigan GOP Chairman Saul Anuzis' support was holding steady, while former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell was trailing.
Thus far, only Duncan has dropped out and thrown his support behind another, though behind-the-scenes negotiations among aides to all the candidates were in full swing. The field is expected to narrow further the more rounds of voting there are, and that means seemingly anyone could end up with a majority.
The results of the first three rounds boded poorly for Duncan, whose lost votes at every turn while Steele and Dawson gained. From the start of the voting, the majority of the RNC cast votes that indicate members want a new direction under a fresh leader, rather than a chairman who is linked to the unpopular former president. Sphere: Related Content
Obama Signs Equal-Pay Legislation
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
New York Times
WASHINGTON — President Obama signed his first bill into law on Thursday, approving equal-pay legislation that he said would “send a clear message that making our economy work means making sure it works for everybody.”
Mr. Obama was surrounded by a group of beaming lawmakers, most but not all of them Democrats, in the East Room of the White House as he affixed his signature to the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, a law named for an Alabama woman who at the end of a 19-year career as a supervisor in a tire factory complained that she had been paid less than men.
After a Supreme Court ruling against her, Congress approved the legislation that expands workers’ rights to sue in this kind of case, relaxing the statute of limitations.
“It is fitting that with the very first bill I sign — the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act — we are upholding one of this nation’s first principles: that we are all created equal and each deserve a chance to pursue our own version of happiness,” the president said.
He said was signing the bill not only in honor of Ms. Ledbetter — who stood behind him, shaking her head and clasping her hands in seeming disbelief — but in honor of his own grandmother, “who worked in a bank all her life, and even after she hit that glass ceiling, kept getting up again” and for his daughters, “because I want them to grow up in a nation that values their contributions, where there are no limits to their dreams.”
The ceremony, and a reception afterward in the State Dining Room of the White House, had a celebratory feel. The East Room was packed with advocates for civil rights and workers rights; the legislators, who included House and Senate leaders and two moderate Republicans — Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, both of Maine — shook Mr. Obama’s hand effusively (some, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, received presidential pecks on the cheek) as he took the stage. They looked over his shoulder, practically glowing, as Mr. Obama signed his name to the bill, using one pen for each letter.
“I’ve been practicing signing my name very slowly,” Mr. Obama said wryly, looking at a bank of pens before him. He handed the first pen to the bill’s chief sponsor, Senator Barbara Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland, and the last to Ms. Ledbetter.
The ceremony also marked First Lady Michelle Obama’s policy debut; she spoke afterward in a reception in the State Dining Room, where she called Ms. Ledbetter “one of my favorite people.”
Mr. Obama told Ms. Ledbetter’s story over and over again during his campaign for the White House; she spoke frequently as an advocate for him during his campaign, and made an appearance at the Democratic National Convention in Denver.
Now 70, Ms. Ledbetter discovered when she was nearing retirement that her male colleagues were earning much more than she was. A jury found her employer, the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company plant in Gadsden, Ala., guilty of pay discrimination. But in a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court threw out the case, ruling that she should have filed her suit within 180 days of the date that Goodyear first paid her less than her peers.
Congress tried to pass a law that would have effectively overturned the decision while President George W. Bush was still in office, but the White House opposed the bill; opponents contended it would encourage lawsuits and argued that employees could delay filing their claims in the hope of reaping bigger rewards. But the new Congress passed the bill, which restarts the six-month clock every time the worker receives a paycheck.
Ms. Ledbetter will not see any money as a result of the legislation Mr. Obama signed into law. But what she has gotten, aside from celebrity, is personal satisfaction, as she said in the State Dining Room after the signing ceremony.
“Goodyear will never have to pay me what it cheated me out of,” she said. “In fact, I will never see a cent. But with the president’s signature today I have an even richer reward.” Sphere: Related Content
New York Times
WASHINGTON — President Obama signed his first bill into law on Thursday, approving equal-pay legislation that he said would “send a clear message that making our economy work means making sure it works for everybody.”
Mr. Obama was surrounded by a group of beaming lawmakers, most but not all of them Democrats, in the East Room of the White House as he affixed his signature to the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, a law named for an Alabama woman who at the end of a 19-year career as a supervisor in a tire factory complained that she had been paid less than men.
After a Supreme Court ruling against her, Congress approved the legislation that expands workers’ rights to sue in this kind of case, relaxing the statute of limitations.
“It is fitting that with the very first bill I sign — the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act — we are upholding one of this nation’s first principles: that we are all created equal and each deserve a chance to pursue our own version of happiness,” the president said.
He said was signing the bill not only in honor of Ms. Ledbetter — who stood behind him, shaking her head and clasping her hands in seeming disbelief — but in honor of his own grandmother, “who worked in a bank all her life, and even after she hit that glass ceiling, kept getting up again” and for his daughters, “because I want them to grow up in a nation that values their contributions, where there are no limits to their dreams.”
The ceremony, and a reception afterward in the State Dining Room of the White House, had a celebratory feel. The East Room was packed with advocates for civil rights and workers rights; the legislators, who included House and Senate leaders and two moderate Republicans — Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, both of Maine — shook Mr. Obama’s hand effusively (some, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, received presidential pecks on the cheek) as he took the stage. They looked over his shoulder, practically glowing, as Mr. Obama signed his name to the bill, using one pen for each letter.
“I’ve been practicing signing my name very slowly,” Mr. Obama said wryly, looking at a bank of pens before him. He handed the first pen to the bill’s chief sponsor, Senator Barbara Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland, and the last to Ms. Ledbetter.
The ceremony also marked First Lady Michelle Obama’s policy debut; she spoke afterward in a reception in the State Dining Room, where she called Ms. Ledbetter “one of my favorite people.”
Mr. Obama told Ms. Ledbetter’s story over and over again during his campaign for the White House; she spoke frequently as an advocate for him during his campaign, and made an appearance at the Democratic National Convention in Denver.
Now 70, Ms. Ledbetter discovered when she was nearing retirement that her male colleagues were earning much more than she was. A jury found her employer, the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company plant in Gadsden, Ala., guilty of pay discrimination. But in a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court threw out the case, ruling that she should have filed her suit within 180 days of the date that Goodyear first paid her less than her peers.
Congress tried to pass a law that would have effectively overturned the decision while President George W. Bush was still in office, but the White House opposed the bill; opponents contended it would encourage lawsuits and argued that employees could delay filing their claims in the hope of reaping bigger rewards. But the new Congress passed the bill, which restarts the six-month clock every time the worker receives a paycheck.
Ms. Ledbetter will not see any money as a result of the legislation Mr. Obama signed into law. But what she has gotten, aside from celebrity, is personal satisfaction, as she said in the State Dining Room after the signing ceremony.
“Goodyear will never have to pay me what it cheated me out of,” she said. “In fact, I will never see a cent. But with the president’s signature today I have an even richer reward.” Sphere: Related Content
Obama May Seek Republican for Cabinet
By JEFF ZELENY and CARL HULSE
New York Times
WASHINGTON — President Obama and his advisers have approached Senator Judd Gregg, Republican of New Hampshire, about becoming commerce secretary, a step that could open the way to significant shift in the balance of power in Congress.
If Mr. Gregg accepted the post, he would probably be replaced by a Democrat. Now, there are 58 Democrats in the Senate, with the number rising to 59 if Al Franken of Minnesota is seated after the court challenge to his race is completed. The replacement of Mr. Gregg could give Democrats 60 seats, the number needed to control the legislative agenda without the threat of Republican filibusters.
Earlier this week, Mr. Gregg was quoted praising the president as “a tour de force.” Asked Thursday about his interest in the commerce job, Mr. Gregg said he would not discuss it.
“I can’t tell you anything,” said Mr. Gregg, the ranking Republican on the Budget Committee. “I have no comment.”
Mr. Gregg is nearing the end of his third term in the Senate, and faces re-election in 2010. Should he accept the position, New Hampshire’s governor, John Lynch, a Democrat, would appoint his successor and would be likely to pick a Democrat.
The possibility was a surprise to some of Mr. Gregg’s Republican colleagues, who at the moment have the bare minimum number of senators to raise procedural hurdles to Democratic measures. If Democrats captured a 60th seat, it would give them added muscle to push Mr. Obama’s agenda.
The post of commerce secretary is the only remaining position in Mr. Obama’s cabinet for which there is no nominee. It became vacant last month after Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico withdrew his name in the wake of a federal investigation into state government contracts.
Bill Burton, a White House spokesman, said Thursday evening that “the president has still not made his pick.” A senior administration official said the commerce secretary position had not been narrowed down to a sole finalist. Sphere: Related Content
New York Times
WASHINGTON — President Obama and his advisers have approached Senator Judd Gregg, Republican of New Hampshire, about becoming commerce secretary, a step that could open the way to significant shift in the balance of power in Congress.
If Mr. Gregg accepted the post, he would probably be replaced by a Democrat. Now, there are 58 Democrats in the Senate, with the number rising to 59 if Al Franken of Minnesota is seated after the court challenge to his race is completed. The replacement of Mr. Gregg could give Democrats 60 seats, the number needed to control the legislative agenda without the threat of Republican filibusters.
Earlier this week, Mr. Gregg was quoted praising the president as “a tour de force.” Asked Thursday about his interest in the commerce job, Mr. Gregg said he would not discuss it.
“I can’t tell you anything,” said Mr. Gregg, the ranking Republican on the Budget Committee. “I have no comment.”
Mr. Gregg is nearing the end of his third term in the Senate, and faces re-election in 2010. Should he accept the position, New Hampshire’s governor, John Lynch, a Democrat, would appoint his successor and would be likely to pick a Democrat.
The possibility was a surprise to some of Mr. Gregg’s Republican colleagues, who at the moment have the bare minimum number of senators to raise procedural hurdles to Democratic measures. If Democrats captured a 60th seat, it would give them added muscle to push Mr. Obama’s agenda.
The post of commerce secretary is the only remaining position in Mr. Obama’s cabinet for which there is no nominee. It became vacant last month after Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico withdrew his name in the wake of a federal investigation into state government contracts.
Bill Burton, a White House spokesman, said Thursday evening that “the president has still not made his pick.” A senior administration official said the commerce secretary position had not been narrowed down to a sole finalist. Sphere: Related Content
House Passes Stimulus Package - List of Roll Call Vote
In response to an overwhelming number of inquiries on who voted for and against the Stimulus Bill, I found the information over at thomas.loc.gov
FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 46
(Democrats in roman; Republicans in italic; Independents underlined) H R 1
TOTALS
244 YEAS
188 NAYS
1 NOT VOTING
---- NOT VOTING 1 ---
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Sphere: Related Content
The information is as follows for H.R. 1 as introduced by Rep. David Obey (D-WI)
FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 46
(Democrats in roman; Republicans in italic; Independents underlined) H R 1
YEA-AND-NAY 28-Jan-2009 6:11 PM QUESTION: On Passage BILL TITLE: Making supplemental appropriations for fiscal year ending 2009
Democratic
244 YEAS
11 NAYS
Republican
244 YEAS
11 NAYS
Republican
0 YEAS
177 NAYS
1 NOT VOTING
177 NAYS
1 NOT VOTING
TOTALS
244 YEAS
188 NAYS
1 NOT VOTING
Abercrombie Ackerman Adler (NJ)Altmire Andrews Arcuri Baca Baird Baldwin Barrow Bean Becerra Berkley Berman Berry Bishop (GA) Bishop (NY) Blumenauer Boccieri Boren Boswell Boucher Brady (PA) Braley (IA) Brown, Corrine; Butterfield Capps Capuano Cardoza Carnahan Carney Carson (IN) Castor (FL) Chandler Childers Clarke Clay Cleaver Clyburn Cohen Connolly (VA) Conyers Costa Costello Courtney Crowley Cuellar Cummings Dahlkemper Davis (AL); Davis (CA); Davis (IL); Davis (TN); DeFazio DeGette Delahunt DeLauro Dicks Dingell Doggett Donnelly (IN) Doyle Driehaus Edwards (MD); Edwards (TX); Ellison Engel Eshoo Etheridge Farr Fattah Filner Foster Frank (MA) Fudge Giffords Gonzalez Gordon (TN) Grayson Green, Al; Green, Gene; Grijalva Gutierrez Hall (NY) Halvorson Hare Harman Hastings (FL) Heinrich Herseth Sandlin; Higgins Hill Himes Hinchey Hinojosa Hirono Hodes Holden Holt Honda Hoyer Inslee Israel Jackson (IL); Jackson-Lee (TX); Johnson (GA) Johnson, E. B.; Kagen Kaptur Kennedy Kildee Kilpatrick (MI); Kilroy Kind Kirkpatrick (AZ); Kissell Klein (FL); Kosmas Kucinich Langevin Larsen (WA); Larson (CT); Lee (CA); Levin Lewis (GA) Lipinski Loebsack Lofgren, Zoe; Lowey Luján Lynch Maffei Maloney Markey (CO); Markey (MA); Marshall Massa Matheson Matsui McCarthy (NY); McCollum McDermott McGovern McIntyre McMahon McNerney Meek (FL); Meeks (NY); Melancon Michaud Miller (NC); Miller, George; Mitchell Mollohan Moore (KS); Moore (WI); Moran (VA); Murphy (CT); Murphy, Patrick; Murtha Nadler (NY) Napolitano Neal (MA) Nye Oberstar Obey Olver Ortiz Pallone Pascrell Pastor (AZ)Payne Pelosi Perlmutter Perriello Peters Pingree (ME) Polis (CO) Pomeroy Price (NC)Rahall Rangel Reyes Richardson Rodriguez Ross Rothman (NJ) Roybal-Allard Ruppersberger Rush Ryan (OH) Salazar Sánchez, Linda T.; Sanchez, Loretta; Sarbanes Schakowsky Schauer Schiff Schrader Schwartz Scott (GA); Scott (VA); Serrano Sestak Shea-Porter Sherman Sires Skelton Slaughter Smith (WA) Snyder Solis (CA)Space Speier Spratt Stark Stupak Sutton Tanner Tauscher Teague Thompson (CA); Thompson (MS); Tierney Titus Tonko Towns Tsongas VanHollen Velázquez Visclosky Walz Wasserman SchultzWaters Watson Watt Waxman Weiner Welch Wexler Wilson (OH) Woolsey WuYarmuth
Aderholt Akin Alexander Austria Bachmann Bachus Barrett (SC); Bartlett Barton (TX)Biggert Bilbray Bilirakis Bishop (UT) Blackburn Blunt Boehner Bonner Bono Mack; Boozman BoustanyBoyd Brady (TX) Bright Broun (GA) Brown (SC) Buchanan Burgess Burton (IN)Buyer Calvert Camp Campbell Cantor Cao Capito Carter Cassidy Castle Chaffetz Coble Coffman (CO)Cole Conaway Cooper Crenshaw Culberson Davis (KY) Deal (GA) Dent Diaz-Balart, L.;Diaz-Balart M.; Dreier Duncan Ehlers Ellsworth Emerson Fallin Flake Fleming Forbes Fortenberry Foxx Franks (AZ); Frelinghuysen Gallegly Garrett (NJ) Gerlach Gingrey (GA)Gohmert Goodlatte Granger Graves Griffith Guthrie Hall (TX) Harper Hastings (WA)Heller Hensarling Herger Hoekstra Hunter Inglis Issa Jenkins Johnson (IL); Johnson, Sam; Jones Jordan (OH)Kanjorski King (IA); King (NY); Kingston Kirk Kline (MN) Kratovil Lamborn Lance Latham LaTourette Latta Lee (NY); Lewis (CA); Linder LoBiondo Lucas Luetkemeyer Lummis Lungren, Daniel E.; Mack Manzullo Marchant McCarthy (CA)McCaul McClintock McCotter McHenry McHugh McKeon McMorris-Rodgers; Mica Miller (FL); Miller (MI); Miller, Gary; Minnick Moran (KS) Murphy, Tim; Myrick Neugebauer Nunes Olson Paul Paulsen Pence Peterson Petri Pitts Platts Poe (TX); Posey Price (GA); Putnam Radanovich Rehberg Reichert Roe (TN) Rogers (AL); Rogers (KY); Rogers (MI); Rohrabacher Rooney Ros-Lehtinen Roskam Royce Ryan (WI)Scalise Schmidt Schock Sensenbrenner Sessions Shadegg Shimkus Shuler Shuster Simpson Smith (NE); Smith (NJ); Smith (TX); Souder Stearns Sullivan Taylor Terry Thompson (PA)Thornberry Tiahrt Tiberi Turner Upton Walden Wamp Westmoreland Whitfield Wilson (SC) Wittman Wolf Young (AK); Young (FL)
---- NOT VOTING 1 ---
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Here is a list of the 11 Democrats who cross-over in a true bi-partisan manner and voted NAY:
These 11 members are going to be under a lot of pressure from Nancy Pelosi and Democratic House Leadership, two of whom are pictured below. Please take the time to thank the 11 bi-partisan democrats for their courageous stand. I have linked their websites to their names in the above list.
Sphere: Related Content
Thursday, January 29, 2009
AP: IMPEACHED! Blagojevich Out, Quinn In
Ill. Gov Unanimously Convicted, Tossed from Office
By Christopher Wills
Associated Press
Gov. Rod Blagojevich was unanimously convicted at his impeachment trial and thrown out of office Thursday, ending a nearly two-month crisis that erupted with his arrest on charges he tried to sell Barack Obama's vacant Senate seat. Blagojevich becomes the first U.S. governor in more than 20 years to be removed by impeachment.
After a four-day trial, the Illinois Senate voted 59-0 to convict him of abuse of power, automatically ousting the second-term Democrat. Democratic Lt. Gov. Patrick Quinn, one of his critics, immediately became governor.
In a second 59-0 vote, the Senate further barred Blagojevich from ever holding public office in Illinois again.
"He failed the test of character. He is beneath the dignity of the state of Illinois. He is no longer worthy to be our governor," said Sen. Matt Murphy, a Republican from suburban Chicago.
Blagojevich's ordeal is far from over. Federal prosecutors are expected to bring a corruption indictment against him by April, after which a trial date will be set.
Blagojevich, 52, had boycotted the first three days of the impeachment trial, calling the proceedings a kangaroo court. But on Thursday, he went before the Senate to beg for his job, delivering a 47-minute plea that was, by turns, defiant, humble and sentimental.
He argued, again, that he did nothing wrong, and warned that his impeachment would set a "dangerous and chilling precedent."
"You haven't proved a crime, and you can't because it didn't happen," Blagojevich (pronounced blah-GOY-uh-vich) told the lawmakers. "How can you throw a governor out of office with insufficient and incomplete evidence?"
The verdict brought to an end what one lawmaker branded "the freak show" in Illinois. Over the past few weeks, Blagojevich found himself isolated, with almost the entire political establishment lined up against him. The furor paralyzed state government and made Blagojevich and his helmet of lush, dark hair a punchline from coast to coast.
In a solemn scene, more than 30 lawmakers rose one by one on the Senate floor to accuse Blagojevich of abusing his office and embarrassing the state. They denounced him as a hypocrite, saying he cynically tried to enrich himself and then posed as the brave protector of the poor and "wrapped himself in the constitution" by decrying the impeachment process as unfair.
They sprinkled their remarks historical references, from Pearl Harbor's "day of infamy" to "the whole world is watching" chant from the riots that broke out during the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago. They cited Abraham Lincoln, the Martin Luther King Jr. and Jesus as they called for the governor's removal.
"We have this thing called impeachment and it's bleeping golden and we've used it the right way," Democratic Sen. James Meeks of Chicago said during the debate, mocking Blagojevich's expletive-laden words as captured by the FBI on a wiretap.
Not a single legislator rose in Blagojevich's defense.
Blagojevich did not stick around to hear the vote. He took a state plane back to Chicago. Returning to his North Side home, he told reporters he planned to go jogging. But he had not left the house when the vote came down.
The verdict capped a head-spinning string of developments that began less than two months ago. It was widely known that federal prosecutors had been investigating Blagojevich's administration for years - some of his closest cronies have already been convicted - but his Dec. 9 arrest by the FBI caught nearly everyone off guard.
The most spectacular allegation was that Blagojevich had been caught on wiretaps scheming to sell an appointment to Obama's Senate seat for campaign cash or a plum job for himself or his wife.
"I've got this thing and it's (expletive) golden, and I'm just not giving it up for (expletive) nothing. I'm not gonna do it," he was quoted as saying on a government wiretap.
Prosecutors also said he illegally pressured people to make campaign contributions and tried to get editorial writers fired from the Chicago Tribune for badmouthing him in print.
Obama himself, fresh from his historic election victory, was forced to look into the matter and issued a report concluding that no one in his inner circle had done anything wrong.
In the brash and often theatrical style that has infuriated fellow politicians for years, Blagojevich repeatedly refused to resign, reciting the poetry of Kipling and Tennyson and declaring at one point last month: "I will fight. I will fight. I will fight until I take my last breath. I have done nothing wrong."
Even as lawmakers were deciding whether to launch an impeachment, Blagojevich defied the political establishment and stunned everyone by appointing a former Illinois attorney general, Roland Burris, to the very Senate seat he had been accused of trying to sell. Top Democrats on Capitol Hill eventually backed down and seated Burris.
As his trial got under way, Blagojevich launched a media blitz, rushing from one TV studio to another in New York to proclaim his innocence. He likened himself to the hero of a Frank Capra movie and to a cowboy in the hands of a Wild West lynch mob.
The impeachment case included not only the criminal charges against Blagojevich, but allegations he broke the law when it came to hiring state workers, expanded a health care program without legislative approval and spent $2.6 million on flu vaccine that went to waste. The 118-member House twice voted to impeach him, both times with only one "no" vote.
By making a speech in the Senate chamber instead of testifying, Blagojevich did not have to take an oath or answer any questions.
In his plea, Blagojevich portrayed himself as a victim of retaliation from the Legislature for his efforts to help the poor.
He acknowledged the truth about his conduct is "maybe not flattering in some cases," referring to the secretly recorded conversations. But he said the tapes captured something that "all of us in politics do in order to run campaigns and win elections."
Seven other U.S. governors have been removed by impeachment, the most recent being Arizona's Evan Mecham, who was driven from office in 1988 for trying to thwart an investigation into a death threat allegedly made by an aide. Illinois never before impeached a governor, despite its long and rich history of graft.
Blagojevich grew up in a working-class Chicago neighborhood, the son of a Serbian immigrant steelworker. He graduated from Northwestern University and earned a law degree from Pepperdine University in California.
Schooled in the bare-knuckle, backroom politics of the infamous Chicago Machine, he got elected to the Illinois House in 1992 and Congress in 1996.
In 2002, he was elected governor on a promise to clean up state government after former GOP Gov. George Ryan, who is serving six years in prison for graft. But he soon wound up in open battles with lawmakers from his own party, leading to gridlock. And scandal followed as well.
Antoin "Tony" Rezko, a former top fundraiser for Blagojevich, was convicted of shaking down businesses seeking state contracts for campaign contributions. Witnesses testified that Blagojevich was aware of some of the strong-arm tactics. Rezko is said to be cooperating with prosecutors.
Quinn, the new governor, is a 60-year-old former state treasurer who has a reputation as a political gadfly and once led a successful effort to cut the size of the Illinois House. Sphere: Related Content
By Christopher Wills
Associated Press
Gov. Rod Blagojevich was unanimously convicted at his impeachment trial and thrown out of office Thursday, ending a nearly two-month crisis that erupted with his arrest on charges he tried to sell Barack Obama's vacant Senate seat. Blagojevich becomes the first U.S. governor in more than 20 years to be removed by impeachment.
After a four-day trial, the Illinois Senate voted 59-0 to convict him of abuse of power, automatically ousting the second-term Democrat. Democratic Lt. Gov. Patrick Quinn, one of his critics, immediately became governor.
In a second 59-0 vote, the Senate further barred Blagojevich from ever holding public office in Illinois again.
"He failed the test of character. He is beneath the dignity of the state of Illinois. He is no longer worthy to be our governor," said Sen. Matt Murphy, a Republican from suburban Chicago.
Blagojevich's ordeal is far from over. Federal prosecutors are expected to bring a corruption indictment against him by April, after which a trial date will be set.
Blagojevich, 52, had boycotted the first three days of the impeachment trial, calling the proceedings a kangaroo court. But on Thursday, he went before the Senate to beg for his job, delivering a 47-minute plea that was, by turns, defiant, humble and sentimental.
He argued, again, that he did nothing wrong, and warned that his impeachment would set a "dangerous and chilling precedent."
"You haven't proved a crime, and you can't because it didn't happen," Blagojevich (pronounced blah-GOY-uh-vich) told the lawmakers. "How can you throw a governor out of office with insufficient and incomplete evidence?"
The verdict brought to an end what one lawmaker branded "the freak show" in Illinois. Over the past few weeks, Blagojevich found himself isolated, with almost the entire political establishment lined up against him. The furor paralyzed state government and made Blagojevich and his helmet of lush, dark hair a punchline from coast to coast.
In a solemn scene, more than 30 lawmakers rose one by one on the Senate floor to accuse Blagojevich of abusing his office and embarrassing the state. They denounced him as a hypocrite, saying he cynically tried to enrich himself and then posed as the brave protector of the poor and "wrapped himself in the constitution" by decrying the impeachment process as unfair.
They sprinkled their remarks historical references, from Pearl Harbor's "day of infamy" to "the whole world is watching" chant from the riots that broke out during the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago. They cited Abraham Lincoln, the Martin Luther King Jr. and Jesus as they called for the governor's removal.
"We have this thing called impeachment and it's bleeping golden and we've used it the right way," Democratic Sen. James Meeks of Chicago said during the debate, mocking Blagojevich's expletive-laden words as captured by the FBI on a wiretap.
Not a single legislator rose in Blagojevich's defense.
Blagojevich did not stick around to hear the vote. He took a state plane back to Chicago. Returning to his North Side home, he told reporters he planned to go jogging. But he had not left the house when the vote came down.
The verdict capped a head-spinning string of developments that began less than two months ago. It was widely known that federal prosecutors had been investigating Blagojevich's administration for years - some of his closest cronies have already been convicted - but his Dec. 9 arrest by the FBI caught nearly everyone off guard.
The most spectacular allegation was that Blagojevich had been caught on wiretaps scheming to sell an appointment to Obama's Senate seat for campaign cash or a plum job for himself or his wife.
"I've got this thing and it's (expletive) golden, and I'm just not giving it up for (expletive) nothing. I'm not gonna do it," he was quoted as saying on a government wiretap.
Prosecutors also said he illegally pressured people to make campaign contributions and tried to get editorial writers fired from the Chicago Tribune for badmouthing him in print.
Obama himself, fresh from his historic election victory, was forced to look into the matter and issued a report concluding that no one in his inner circle had done anything wrong.
In the brash and often theatrical style that has infuriated fellow politicians for years, Blagojevich repeatedly refused to resign, reciting the poetry of Kipling and Tennyson and declaring at one point last month: "I will fight. I will fight. I will fight until I take my last breath. I have done nothing wrong."
Even as lawmakers were deciding whether to launch an impeachment, Blagojevich defied the political establishment and stunned everyone by appointing a former Illinois attorney general, Roland Burris, to the very Senate seat he had been accused of trying to sell. Top Democrats on Capitol Hill eventually backed down and seated Burris.
As his trial got under way, Blagojevich launched a media blitz, rushing from one TV studio to another in New York to proclaim his innocence. He likened himself to the hero of a Frank Capra movie and to a cowboy in the hands of a Wild West lynch mob.
The impeachment case included not only the criminal charges against Blagojevich, but allegations he broke the law when it came to hiring state workers, expanded a health care program without legislative approval and spent $2.6 million on flu vaccine that went to waste. The 118-member House twice voted to impeach him, both times with only one "no" vote.
By making a speech in the Senate chamber instead of testifying, Blagojevich did not have to take an oath or answer any questions.
In his plea, Blagojevich portrayed himself as a victim of retaliation from the Legislature for his efforts to help the poor.
He acknowledged the truth about his conduct is "maybe not flattering in some cases," referring to the secretly recorded conversations. But he said the tapes captured something that "all of us in politics do in order to run campaigns and win elections."
Seven other U.S. governors have been removed by impeachment, the most recent being Arizona's Evan Mecham, who was driven from office in 1988 for trying to thwart an investigation into a death threat allegedly made by an aide. Illinois never before impeached a governor, despite its long and rich history of graft.
Blagojevich grew up in a working-class Chicago neighborhood, the son of a Serbian immigrant steelworker. He graduated from Northwestern University and earned a law degree from Pepperdine University in California.
Schooled in the bare-knuckle, backroom politics of the infamous Chicago Machine, he got elected to the Illinois House in 1992 and Congress in 1996.
In 2002, he was elected governor on a promise to clean up state government after former GOP Gov. George Ryan, who is serving six years in prison for graft. But he soon wound up in open battles with lawmakers from his own party, leading to gridlock. And scandal followed as well.
Antoin "Tony" Rezko, a former top fundraiser for Blagojevich, was convicted of shaking down businesses seeking state contracts for campaign contributions. Witnesses testified that Blagojevich was aware of some of the strong-arm tactics. Rezko is said to be cooperating with prosecutors.
Quinn, the new governor, is a 60-year-old former state treasurer who has a reputation as a political gadfly and once led a successful effort to cut the size of the Illinois House. Sphere: Related Content
Obama-Limbaugh battle a sign of GOP leadership vacuum
by Joe Garofoli,
San Francisco Chronicle
President Obama has made his first tactical error of his young presidency: He called out conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh.
It happened the other day while Obama was visiting with congressional Republicans in an effort to get them to support his economic stimulus package. Said Obama to the lawmakers: "You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done."
On his Monday program, Limbaugh shot back that the president was "obviously more frightened of me than he is of (Senate Minority Leader) Mitch McConnell. He's more frightened of me than he is of, say, (House Minority Leader) John Boehner, which doesn't say much about our party."
It wasn't that Obama's mention was mean or personal, analysts said. But in citing Limbaugh as influential, the president of the United States elevated a talk show host to his level - the leader of the free world. And in a leadership vacuum like the one that conservatives find themselves in after last November's devastating electoral losses, loud voices - like Limbaugh's with his 13 million weekly listeners - echo even louder.
On Wednesday, Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga., apologized to Limbaugh on his program for telling Politico.com the day before that "it's easy if you're Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh or even sometimes Newt Gingrich to stand back and throw bricks," referring to their criticizing Republicans for not challenging the stimulus package.
Taking credit
Surely on today's program, Limbaugh will take credit for not a single Republican House member supporting the stimulus package that passed Wednesday. On his show Wednesday, Limbaugh called it the "porkulus" package, for all the pork-barrel projects he saw in it.
But while an Oval Office shout-out may temporarily elevate a man who refers to himself as El Rushbo, it doesn't make Limbaugh the de facto leader of the Republican Party or the conservative movement. He is, analysts say, a "conveyer belt" of information, influencer of the wider talk radio universe and an outside-the-Beltway party whip who reins in wayward Republicans - as in those veering toward political moderation.
"Whenever a national party is in search of its identity, its mojo, figures like Rush will fill the vacuum," said Mike Franc, a vice president for government relations at the conservative Heritage Foundation. "But in this situation, he doesn't fill the idea. He's more of an idea aggregator."
New party chair
The real rebuilding of the conservative brand begins Friday when the Republican Party chooses who will be its new party chair. In the absence of a GOP president, House speaker or Senate majority leader, that person will become the face of Republicanism on cable and network chat shows, the party's chief fundraiser and one of conservatism's leaders at a time in which the movement is desperately searching for some leadership.
That quest will continue next month, when hard-core conservatives gather at their annual Conservative Political Action Conference, a coming-to-Mecca type of conference featuring the party's up-and-comers, such as Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., House Minority Whip Eric Cantor, R-Va., and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.
But while the official search goes forward, there is little question that the subtle backhand from Obama gave Limbaugh manna from heaven in talk radio terms.
"Oh, it doesn't get any better than that," said Melanie Morgan, a conservative activist and commentator who used to be part of a highly rated talk show on San Francisco's KSFO-AM. "To have the president of the United States mention you by name, wow."
Champagne time
"The Champagne is flowing in Rush Limbaugh's house," said Michael Harrison, publisher of Talkers magazine, which chronicles the estimated 3,000 talk radio personalities. Its estimate of Limbaugh's audience at 13 million weekly listeners is based on a combination of Arbitron ratings and its own metrics. "Obama gave Limbaugh the most fabulous gift you can give a talk radio host."
Obama's comment came not long after Limbaugh told his listeners that he hopes Obama fails. "We are being told we have to hope he succeeds, that we have to grab our ankles ... because his father was black, because he's the first black president, we've got to accept this."
And as for Obama, "He's probably made the first blunder since he took office," Harrison said. "He's the president of the United States, and anytime you tell people not to listen to someone, you're elevating that person to your level."
"Rush Limbaugh is nothing more than an influential talk radio host. He doesn't represent anyone but himself," Harrison said. In 2002, Talkers named Limbaugh its "Greatest Radio Talk Show Host of All Time."
Big audience, salary
While liberals have compiled 20 years worth of Limbaugh's misinformation and truth-bending rants, he brings home big audiences at a time when media is fragmenting into smaller ones. Last year, he signed a contract extension to continue doing his nationally-syndicated program through 2016 for a reported $400 million.
Limbaugh led the national talk radio revolution in the late 1980s and early 1990s and became a force in rallying support for former Rep. Gingrich, R-Ga., to lead a Republican takeover of the House in 1994. That year, the conservative standard-bearer magazine National Review anointed him on its cover "The Leader of the Opposition."
That said, Limbaugh "is not a leader in the party," said David Keane, chairman of the American Conservative Union, the nation's largest and oldest grassroots conservative lobbying organization and the host of CPAC. "He can't fulfill that role because that's not where he works."
"He's very influential on issues because he becomes sort of a conveyer belt of information to all of these people out there. Everyone else in the talk radio world sort of spins off him, the Sean Hannity's and such of the world," Keane said.
In Congress, Franc of the Heritage Foundation said, many lawmakers pine for Limbaugh's ability to translate complicated policy into simple language and place it in a conservative framework. "There is a lot of Rush-envy there," said Franc, a former staffer for former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, a leader of the mid-1990s Republican revolution.
As for Democrats, "They wish that I would just vanishhhhhhh," Limbaugh said on his Wednesday show, stretching out the last syllable as he often does in his corner of the theater of the mind.
But not every conservative is a fan. Last October, shortly after announcing his support for Obama for president, conservative commentator Christopher Buckley took umbrage at Limbaugh replacing his father, the late William F. Buckley, as a conservative icon.
"Rush, I knew William F. Buckley Jr. William F. Buckley Jr. was a father of mine," Christopher Buckley wrote. "Rush, you're no William F. Buckley Jr."
E-mail Joe Garofoli at jgarofoli@sfchronicle.com.
This article appeared on page A - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle Sphere: Related Content
San Francisco Chronicle
President Obama has made his first tactical error of his young presidency: He called out conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh.
It happened the other day while Obama was visiting with congressional Republicans in an effort to get them to support his economic stimulus package. Said Obama to the lawmakers: "You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done."
On his Monday program, Limbaugh shot back that the president was "obviously more frightened of me than he is of (Senate Minority Leader) Mitch McConnell. He's more frightened of me than he is of, say, (House Minority Leader) John Boehner, which doesn't say much about our party."
It wasn't that Obama's mention was mean or personal, analysts said. But in citing Limbaugh as influential, the president of the United States elevated a talk show host to his level - the leader of the free world. And in a leadership vacuum like the one that conservatives find themselves in after last November's devastating electoral losses, loud voices - like Limbaugh's with his 13 million weekly listeners - echo even louder.
On Wednesday, Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga., apologized to Limbaugh on his program for telling Politico.com the day before that "it's easy if you're Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh or even sometimes Newt Gingrich to stand back and throw bricks," referring to their criticizing Republicans for not challenging the stimulus package.
Taking credit
Surely on today's program, Limbaugh will take credit for not a single Republican House member supporting the stimulus package that passed Wednesday. On his show Wednesday, Limbaugh called it the "porkulus" package, for all the pork-barrel projects he saw in it.
But while an Oval Office shout-out may temporarily elevate a man who refers to himself as El Rushbo, it doesn't make Limbaugh the de facto leader of the Republican Party or the conservative movement. He is, analysts say, a "conveyer belt" of information, influencer of the wider talk radio universe and an outside-the-Beltway party whip who reins in wayward Republicans - as in those veering toward political moderation.
"Whenever a national party is in search of its identity, its mojo, figures like Rush will fill the vacuum," said Mike Franc, a vice president for government relations at the conservative Heritage Foundation. "But in this situation, he doesn't fill the idea. He's more of an idea aggregator."
New party chair
The real rebuilding of the conservative brand begins Friday when the Republican Party chooses who will be its new party chair. In the absence of a GOP president, House speaker or Senate majority leader, that person will become the face of Republicanism on cable and network chat shows, the party's chief fundraiser and one of conservatism's leaders at a time in which the movement is desperately searching for some leadership.
That quest will continue next month, when hard-core conservatives gather at their annual Conservative Political Action Conference, a coming-to-Mecca type of conference featuring the party's up-and-comers, such as Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., House Minority Whip Eric Cantor, R-Va., and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.
But while the official search goes forward, there is little question that the subtle backhand from Obama gave Limbaugh manna from heaven in talk radio terms.
"Oh, it doesn't get any better than that," said Melanie Morgan, a conservative activist and commentator who used to be part of a highly rated talk show on San Francisco's KSFO-AM. "To have the president of the United States mention you by name, wow."
Champagne time
"The Champagne is flowing in Rush Limbaugh's house," said Michael Harrison, publisher of Talkers magazine, which chronicles the estimated 3,000 talk radio personalities. Its estimate of Limbaugh's audience at 13 million weekly listeners is based on a combination of Arbitron ratings and its own metrics. "Obama gave Limbaugh the most fabulous gift you can give a talk radio host."
Obama's comment came not long after Limbaugh told his listeners that he hopes Obama fails. "We are being told we have to hope he succeeds, that we have to grab our ankles ... because his father was black, because he's the first black president, we've got to accept this."
And as for Obama, "He's probably made the first blunder since he took office," Harrison said. "He's the president of the United States, and anytime you tell people not to listen to someone, you're elevating that person to your level."
"Rush Limbaugh is nothing more than an influential talk radio host. He doesn't represent anyone but himself," Harrison said. In 2002, Talkers named Limbaugh its "Greatest Radio Talk Show Host of All Time."
Big audience, salary
While liberals have compiled 20 years worth of Limbaugh's misinformation and truth-bending rants, he brings home big audiences at a time when media is fragmenting into smaller ones. Last year, he signed a contract extension to continue doing his nationally-syndicated program through 2016 for a reported $400 million.
Limbaugh led the national talk radio revolution in the late 1980s and early 1990s and became a force in rallying support for former Rep. Gingrich, R-Ga., to lead a Republican takeover of the House in 1994. That year, the conservative standard-bearer magazine National Review anointed him on its cover "The Leader of the Opposition."
That said, Limbaugh "is not a leader in the party," said David Keane, chairman of the American Conservative Union, the nation's largest and oldest grassroots conservative lobbying organization and the host of CPAC. "He can't fulfill that role because that's not where he works."
"He's very influential on issues because he becomes sort of a conveyer belt of information to all of these people out there. Everyone else in the talk radio world sort of spins off him, the Sean Hannity's and such of the world," Keane said.
In Congress, Franc of the Heritage Foundation said, many lawmakers pine for Limbaugh's ability to translate complicated policy into simple language and place it in a conservative framework. "There is a lot of Rush-envy there," said Franc, a former staffer for former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, a leader of the mid-1990s Republican revolution.
As for Democrats, "They wish that I would just vanishhhhhhh," Limbaugh said on his Wednesday show, stretching out the last syllable as he often does in his corner of the theater of the mind.
But not every conservative is a fan. Last October, shortly after announcing his support for Obama for president, conservative commentator Christopher Buckley took umbrage at Limbaugh replacing his father, the late William F. Buckley, as a conservative icon.
"Rush, I knew William F. Buckley Jr. William F. Buckley Jr. was a father of mine," Christopher Buckley wrote. "Rush, you're no William F. Buckley Jr."
E-mail Joe Garofoli at jgarofoli@sfchronicle.com.
This article appeared on page A - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle Sphere: Related Content
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Obama holds GOP-only talks on stimulus package
by Carolyn Lochhead,
San Francisco Chronicle
Washington Bureau
It's a rare sight in Washington to see the president walking the halls of the Congress, stopping to talk to reporters in the usual hallway haunts, and rarer still to see him meet with the opposition party to hear their ideas on the first big legislation of his presidency.
Still stranger was this: The leaders of the out-of-power party, thrashed in two consecutive elections and the subject of all this presidential courting, told their members to vote against the president before he even arrived to hear their grievances.
Hours before President Obama arrived Tuesday for GOP-only talks in the House and Senate on the $825 billion economic stimulus bill, House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio and his deputy, Rep. Eric Cantor of Virginia, told a closed-door meeting of Republicans to vote against the bill because it has too much government and will not revive the economy.
To be sure, Republicans sounded less churlish when they came out of their meetings with Obama. They sang his praises for reaching out to them and instead blamed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco and other Democratic leaders for writing the legislation without them.
Surprised by openness
Some seemed surprised at how friendly and open Obama was. Others noted the advantages he brought as a former Senate colleague.
"One of his great strengths is, he's very comfortable with himself, and therefore others are comfortable with him," said Senate Republican conference chair Lamar Alexander of Tennessee. "I think he has a certain ease about him. He did as a senator, and I think he's made an easy transition to the presidency. After all, as he did remind us, he's only been there five days."
Even the most conservative Republicans praised Obama as being genuine and open before denouncing the stimulus as a waste of money and a pile of new debt.
Republicans want more tax cuts. Economists argue that the problem with tax cuts is that in recessions, they are mostly saved, not spent, and so have very little stimulative effect. Republicans acknowledged that and so argued to make them permanent - essentially the policy of the Bush administration.
Obama said that part of his effort is to change politics as usual in Washington and break through the traditional partisan bickering over ideology to focus on what might work.
He argued that economic indicators are so bad - including plans to lay off tens of thousands more people announced on Monday by major companies such as Home Depot and Caterpillar - that Congress should pull together quickly behind a stimulus plan that can help stop the bleeding.
"I try to remind people that even with modifications made in the House, we still have $275 billion of tax cuts" in the stimulus Obama said. He said he reminded Republicans that he started out with $300 billion in tax cuts "that got a lot of praise from the Republican side and some grousing from my side of the aisle. I think we're still working through the process, but I'm very grateful" for the opportunity to listen.
The House is set to vote on the bill today. The Senate will take longer, and then the two different versions must be reconciled - a point at which House Republicans plan to make their presence felt.
Bipartisan hopes
The White House is hoping for a bipartisan vote to set the tone for much tougher battles to come over a new banking-system rescue, health care reform, energy and a host of other issues.
Obama asked Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, to remove from the bill $200 million for family-planning services to low-income people that had become a hot Republican talking point. Waxman complied.
"The president took some very tough questions, didn't dodge them, gave very direct and specific answers," said Sen. Robert Bennett, R-Utah. Nonetheless, Bennett, echoing many other Republicans, said he and others "are not completely convinced that it will, in fact, produce a stimulus."
Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., who recently suggested that Guantanamo Bay prisoners should be sent to Alcatraz, complained that "bailing out profligate states like California that have not been able to control their budget does not seem to me to be the highest priority for federal spending."
Republicans also pointed out Congressional Budget Office estimates for the stimulus that show an additional nearly $350 billion in interest payments over 10 years, bringing the total cost of the stimulus to nearly $1.2 trillion. They said Obama may want to make investments, but congressional Democrats added items that Bond said were "just thrown in at the last minute" and won't stop job losses.
President confident
Obama said he is confident that things can be worked out.
"But the key right now is to make sure that we keep politics to a minimum," he said. "There are some legitimate philosophical differences with parts of my plan that the Republicans have, and I respect that. In some cases, they may just not be as familiar with what's in the package as I would like. I don't expect 100 percent agreement from my Republican colleagues, but I do hope that we can all put politics aside and do the American people's business right now."
Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Walnut Creek, said she ran into a GOP colleague who had just come out of the meeting with Obama.
"He said, 'He's just so impressive,' " Tauscher said. "I said, 'He's the real deal, isn't he?' But will he vote with us tomorrow? Probably not."
She blasted Boehner and Cantor for urging their members to vote against the package before even listening to what Obama had to say.
"Are you really going to listen to the people who lost the House for you?" Tauscher commented. "At some point, you have to vote your conscience."
Chronicle staff writer Zachary Coile contributed to this report. E-mail Carolyn Lochhead at clochhead@sfchronicle.com. Sphere: Related Content
San Francisco Chronicle
Washington Bureau
It's a rare sight in Washington to see the president walking the halls of the Congress, stopping to talk to reporters in the usual hallway haunts, and rarer still to see him meet with the opposition party to hear their ideas on the first big legislation of his presidency.
Still stranger was this: The leaders of the out-of-power party, thrashed in two consecutive elections and the subject of all this presidential courting, told their members to vote against the president before he even arrived to hear their grievances.
Hours before President Obama arrived Tuesday for GOP-only talks in the House and Senate on the $825 billion economic stimulus bill, House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio and his deputy, Rep. Eric Cantor of Virginia, told a closed-door meeting of Republicans to vote against the bill because it has too much government and will not revive the economy.
To be sure, Republicans sounded less churlish when they came out of their meetings with Obama. They sang his praises for reaching out to them and instead blamed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco and other Democratic leaders for writing the legislation without them.
Surprised by openness
Some seemed surprised at how friendly and open Obama was. Others noted the advantages he brought as a former Senate colleague.
"One of his great strengths is, he's very comfortable with himself, and therefore others are comfortable with him," said Senate Republican conference chair Lamar Alexander of Tennessee. "I think he has a certain ease about him. He did as a senator, and I think he's made an easy transition to the presidency. After all, as he did remind us, he's only been there five days."
Even the most conservative Republicans praised Obama as being genuine and open before denouncing the stimulus as a waste of money and a pile of new debt.
Republicans want more tax cuts. Economists argue that the problem with tax cuts is that in recessions, they are mostly saved, not spent, and so have very little stimulative effect. Republicans acknowledged that and so argued to make them permanent - essentially the policy of the Bush administration.
Obama said that part of his effort is to change politics as usual in Washington and break through the traditional partisan bickering over ideology to focus on what might work.
He argued that economic indicators are so bad - including plans to lay off tens of thousands more people announced on Monday by major companies such as Home Depot and Caterpillar - that Congress should pull together quickly behind a stimulus plan that can help stop the bleeding.
"I try to remind people that even with modifications made in the House, we still have $275 billion of tax cuts" in the stimulus Obama said. He said he reminded Republicans that he started out with $300 billion in tax cuts "that got a lot of praise from the Republican side and some grousing from my side of the aisle. I think we're still working through the process, but I'm very grateful" for the opportunity to listen.
The House is set to vote on the bill today. The Senate will take longer, and then the two different versions must be reconciled - a point at which House Republicans plan to make their presence felt.
Bipartisan hopes
The White House is hoping for a bipartisan vote to set the tone for much tougher battles to come over a new banking-system rescue, health care reform, energy and a host of other issues.
Obama asked Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, to remove from the bill $200 million for family-planning services to low-income people that had become a hot Republican talking point. Waxman complied.
"The president took some very tough questions, didn't dodge them, gave very direct and specific answers," said Sen. Robert Bennett, R-Utah. Nonetheless, Bennett, echoing many other Republicans, said he and others "are not completely convinced that it will, in fact, produce a stimulus."
Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., who recently suggested that Guantanamo Bay prisoners should be sent to Alcatraz, complained that "bailing out profligate states like California that have not been able to control their budget does not seem to me to be the highest priority for federal spending."
Republicans also pointed out Congressional Budget Office estimates for the stimulus that show an additional nearly $350 billion in interest payments over 10 years, bringing the total cost of the stimulus to nearly $1.2 trillion. They said Obama may want to make investments, but congressional Democrats added items that Bond said were "just thrown in at the last minute" and won't stop job losses.
President confident
Obama said he is confident that things can be worked out.
"But the key right now is to make sure that we keep politics to a minimum," he said. "There are some legitimate philosophical differences with parts of my plan that the Republicans have, and I respect that. In some cases, they may just not be as familiar with what's in the package as I would like. I don't expect 100 percent agreement from my Republican colleagues, but I do hope that we can all put politics aside and do the American people's business right now."
Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Walnut Creek, said she ran into a GOP colleague who had just come out of the meeting with Obama.
"He said, 'He's just so impressive,' " Tauscher said. "I said, 'He's the real deal, isn't he?' But will he vote with us tomorrow? Probably not."
She blasted Boehner and Cantor for urging their members to vote against the package before even listening to what Obama had to say.
"Are you really going to listen to the people who lost the House for you?" Tauscher commented. "At some point, you have to vote your conscience."
Chronicle staff writer Zachary Coile contributed to this report. E-mail Carolyn Lochhead at clochhead@sfchronicle.com. Sphere: Related Content
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Bill Clinton made millions from foreign sources
By MATTHEW LEE
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON – Former President Bill Clinton earned nearly $6 million in speaking fees last year, almost all of it from foreign companies, according to financial documents filed by his wife, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.
The documents obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press show that $4.6 million of the former president's reported $5.7 million in 2008 honoraria came from foreign sources, including Kuwait's national bank, other firms and groups in Canada, Germany, India, Malaysia, Mexico and Portugal and a Hong Kong-based company that spent $100,000 on federal lobbying last year.
Executives at many of the firms that paid honoraria to Bill Clinton have also donated large amounts of money to the Clinton Foundation, according to documents it released last year as part of an agreement with Congress on Hillary Clinton's nomination as secretary of state. That agreement was aimed at preventing the appearance of any conflict of interest between the ex-president's charitable organization and his wife's new job as the United States' top diplomat.
In addition to Bill Clinton's income from speaking fees, Hillary Clinton reported joint holdings of between $6.1 million and $30.3 million in a blind trust as well as cash, insurance and retirement accounts worth between $1 million and $5.2 million.
Hillary Clinton made between $50,000 and $100,000 in royalties from her 2003 memoir "Living History." Bill Clinton earned between $100,000 and $1 million in royalties for his 2004 autobiography "My Life," the documents show. The Clintons reported no liabilities.
All senior officials in the Obama administration are required to complete a detailed disclosure of their personal finances, including spouse and children, which is updated yearly.
The two men selected to serve as Hillary Clinton's deputy secretaries of state, Jacob Lew and James Steinberg, also filed financial disclosure forms.
Lew, a former Clinton administration official who recently headed Citigroup's Alternative Investments unit, reported 2008 salary income of just over $1 million along with numerous investments, including between $50,000 and $100,000 in State of Israel bonds.
Steinberg, another former Clinton administration official who recently was a professor at the University of Texas, reported receiving $35,000 in 2008 for foreign speaking engagements, including three before Japanese media firms and one before the Confederation of Indian Industries in New Delhi.
The most Bill Clinton got from a foreign source was $1.25 million for appearing at five events sponsored by the Toronto-based Power Within Inc., a company that puts on motivational and training programs around North America, according to Hillary Clinton's submission.
For one Power Within speech alone, delivered in Edmonton in June 2008, Clinton was paid $525,000, the most for any single event that year. For one event, he got $200,000 and for three others he received $175,000 each, the documents show.
The Hong Kong firm, Hybrid Kinetic Automotive Holdings, paid Clinton a $300,000 honorarium on Dec. 4, 2008. Twenty five days later, on Dec. 29, a man listed as the company's chief financial officer, Jack Xi Deng, made a $25,000 cash donation to the Virginia gubernatorial campaign of Clinton confidant Terry McAuliffe, according to the Virginia Public Access Project.
According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the Hong Kong firm paid at least $100,000 in 2008 to lobbyists on immigration issues.
The other foreign honoraria Bill Clinton received in 2008 are:
• $450,000 from AWD Holding AG, a German-based international financial services company.
• $350,000 from the state-owned National Bank of Kuwait. The Kuwaiti government donated between $1 million and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation, according to the foundation's disclosure.
• $300,000 from Value Grupo Financiero SA de CV, a Mexico-based financial holding company, whose chief executive officer, Carlos Bremer Gutierrez, is one of the Clinton Foundation's leading donors. Gutierrez donated between $250,001 to $500,000 to the foundation, according to foundation's documents.
• $250,000 from Germany's Media Control Gmbh, which bills itself as the world's leading provider of entertainment data and was founded by Karlheinz Koegel, who contributed $100,001 to $250,000 to the Clinton foundation.
• $200,000 from Malaysia's Petra Equities Management on behalf of the Sekhar Foundation run by Malaysian multimillionaire Vinod Sekhar who donated between $25,001 and $50,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to its documents.
In addition to the foreign earnings, Bill Clinton made just over $1 million from domestic speaking engagements, including $250,000 from MSG Entertainment, $225,000 from the National Association of Home Care and Hospice, $200,000 from the United Nations Association, $175,000 from the ING North America Insurance Corp., $125,000 from the Rodman and Renshaw Capital Group and $100,000 from the Hollywood Radio and Television Society. Sphere: Related Content
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON – Former President Bill Clinton earned nearly $6 million in speaking fees last year, almost all of it from foreign companies, according to financial documents filed by his wife, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.
The documents obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press show that $4.6 million of the former president's reported $5.7 million in 2008 honoraria came from foreign sources, including Kuwait's national bank, other firms and groups in Canada, Germany, India, Malaysia, Mexico and Portugal and a Hong Kong-based company that spent $100,000 on federal lobbying last year.
Executives at many of the firms that paid honoraria to Bill Clinton have also donated large amounts of money to the Clinton Foundation, according to documents it released last year as part of an agreement with Congress on Hillary Clinton's nomination as secretary of state. That agreement was aimed at preventing the appearance of any conflict of interest between the ex-president's charitable organization and his wife's new job as the United States' top diplomat.
In addition to Bill Clinton's income from speaking fees, Hillary Clinton reported joint holdings of between $6.1 million and $30.3 million in a blind trust as well as cash, insurance and retirement accounts worth between $1 million and $5.2 million.
Hillary Clinton made between $50,000 and $100,000 in royalties from her 2003 memoir "Living History." Bill Clinton earned between $100,000 and $1 million in royalties for his 2004 autobiography "My Life," the documents show. The Clintons reported no liabilities.
All senior officials in the Obama administration are required to complete a detailed disclosure of their personal finances, including spouse and children, which is updated yearly.
The two men selected to serve as Hillary Clinton's deputy secretaries of state, Jacob Lew and James Steinberg, also filed financial disclosure forms.
Lew, a former Clinton administration official who recently headed Citigroup's Alternative Investments unit, reported 2008 salary income of just over $1 million along with numerous investments, including between $50,000 and $100,000 in State of Israel bonds.
Steinberg, another former Clinton administration official who recently was a professor at the University of Texas, reported receiving $35,000 in 2008 for foreign speaking engagements, including three before Japanese media firms and one before the Confederation of Indian Industries in New Delhi.
The most Bill Clinton got from a foreign source was $1.25 million for appearing at five events sponsored by the Toronto-based Power Within Inc., a company that puts on motivational and training programs around North America, according to Hillary Clinton's submission.
For one Power Within speech alone, delivered in Edmonton in June 2008, Clinton was paid $525,000, the most for any single event that year. For one event, he got $200,000 and for three others he received $175,000 each, the documents show.
The Hong Kong firm, Hybrid Kinetic Automotive Holdings, paid Clinton a $300,000 honorarium on Dec. 4, 2008. Twenty five days later, on Dec. 29, a man listed as the company's chief financial officer, Jack Xi Deng, made a $25,000 cash donation to the Virginia gubernatorial campaign of Clinton confidant Terry McAuliffe, according to the Virginia Public Access Project.
According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the Hong Kong firm paid at least $100,000 in 2008 to lobbyists on immigration issues.
The other foreign honoraria Bill Clinton received in 2008 are:
• $450,000 from AWD Holding AG, a German-based international financial services company.
• $350,000 from the state-owned National Bank of Kuwait. The Kuwaiti government donated between $1 million and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation, according to the foundation's disclosure.
• $300,000 from Value Grupo Financiero SA de CV, a Mexico-based financial holding company, whose chief executive officer, Carlos Bremer Gutierrez, is one of the Clinton Foundation's leading donors. Gutierrez donated between $250,001 to $500,000 to the foundation, according to foundation's documents.
• $250,000 from Germany's Media Control Gmbh, which bills itself as the world's leading provider of entertainment data and was founded by Karlheinz Koegel, who contributed $100,001 to $250,000 to the Clinton foundation.
• $200,000 from Malaysia's Petra Equities Management on behalf of the Sekhar Foundation run by Malaysian multimillionaire Vinod Sekhar who donated between $25,001 and $50,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to its documents.
In addition to the foreign earnings, Bill Clinton made just over $1 million from domestic speaking engagements, including $250,000 from MSG Entertainment, $225,000 from the National Association of Home Care and Hospice, $200,000 from the United Nations Association, $175,000 from the ING North America Insurance Corp., $125,000 from the Rodman and Renshaw Capital Group and $100,000 from the Hollywood Radio and Television Society. Sphere: Related Content
What Obama Bounce?
by Will Swarts
www.smartmoney.com
Inauguration week brought plenty of pomp, but didn’t change our economic circumstances. In a jagged week for the markets President Barack Obama’s inauguration failed to spur a rally, and some of our pundits believe a true recovery won’t arrive soon. The Dow Jones Industrial Average plunged 4% as the new commander-in-chief took the oath of office, the worst inaugural day performance on record.
“Investors were boldly and swiftly annihilating whatever value was still left in bank stocks,” said Ed Yardeni, founder of Yardeni Research in a recent note.
While a one-day performance is no barometer for the rest of the year – J.P. Morgan strategist Thomas Lee called current conditions “range-bound” in a Jan. 20 note – there’s a split in thinking about what is on the horizon, especially since it looks like the new administration will engineer a series of legislative initiatives that could have profound impacts on the economy and stocks.
“Following on the heels of the inauguration the next 100 days will likely be a flurry of legislative activity that is likely to impact the markets,” LPL Financial strategist Jeffrey Kleintop wrote Jan. 20.
Kleintop echoed a cautionary sentiment about just how effective some of the moves would be and how investors would react to more government regulation. “The uncertainty and potential for negative consequences as a result of new policy actions may weigh on the market,” he said.
Other market watchers are saying the same thing, making it difficult to gauge when they think the economy will recover. “While the general consensus is for a second half recovery, the data show a clear lack of conviction in that belief,” Citigroup’s Tobias Levkovich wrote Jan. 16.
Adds Ed Hyman, co-founder of ISI Group: “Lagged impacts of policy moves and lower oil prices will eventually get the upper hand, in addition to house prices and inventories finally hitting bottom.” But, he added in a recent research note, “it may not come until 2010.”
David Rosenberg, North American economist at Bank of America Merrill Lynch, wrote Jan. 16 that deflationary pressures created by the collapse of credit markets and sharp cuts in consumer spending will take years to reverse, making a conservative investing strategy the wisest course.
“It will literally take years of fiscal and monetary pump-priming to bring these measures of economic slack to levels that will precipitate the next inflation cycle,” he wrote. “In our view, that is too far beyond the forecasting horizon to be concerned about right now and we expect long Treasurys and any fixed-income instrument with both duration and relative safety attributes to be very compelling at this juncture.”
Can the Obama administration do anything to soothe those concerns and jumpstart the stock market? There is the notion of a so-called “bad bank” that would pull toxic assets out of crippled financial institutions.
Andy Laperriere and Tom Gallagher, policy analysts at ISI Group, point out that valuing these crippled securities is the key to success, and to a credible, well-capitalized banking system that doesn’t have to keep writing off more losses. The government should pay a premium on these assets to avoid a piecemeal approach to nationalization, they said, something a politically strong administration could accomplish in the country’s long-term interests.
“The point of an aggressive policy response,” they wrote, “is not to generate a second-half 2009 recovery as much as it is to avoid a lost decade.” Sphere: Related Content
www.smartmoney.com
Inauguration week brought plenty of pomp, but didn’t change our economic circumstances. In a jagged week for the markets President Barack Obama’s inauguration failed to spur a rally, and some of our pundits believe a true recovery won’t arrive soon. The Dow Jones Industrial Average plunged 4% as the new commander-in-chief took the oath of office, the worst inaugural day performance on record.
“Investors were boldly and swiftly annihilating whatever value was still left in bank stocks,” said Ed Yardeni, founder of Yardeni Research in a recent note.
While a one-day performance is no barometer for the rest of the year – J.P. Morgan strategist Thomas Lee called current conditions “range-bound” in a Jan. 20 note – there’s a split in thinking about what is on the horizon, especially since it looks like the new administration will engineer a series of legislative initiatives that could have profound impacts on the economy and stocks.
“Following on the heels of the inauguration the next 100 days will likely be a flurry of legislative activity that is likely to impact the markets,” LPL Financial strategist Jeffrey Kleintop wrote Jan. 20.
Kleintop echoed a cautionary sentiment about just how effective some of the moves would be and how investors would react to more government regulation. “The uncertainty and potential for negative consequences as a result of new policy actions may weigh on the market,” he said.
Other market watchers are saying the same thing, making it difficult to gauge when they think the economy will recover. “While the general consensus is for a second half recovery, the data show a clear lack of conviction in that belief,” Citigroup’s Tobias Levkovich wrote Jan. 16.
Adds Ed Hyman, co-founder of ISI Group: “Lagged impacts of policy moves and lower oil prices will eventually get the upper hand, in addition to house prices and inventories finally hitting bottom.” But, he added in a recent research note, “it may not come until 2010.”
David Rosenberg, North American economist at Bank of America Merrill Lynch, wrote Jan. 16 that deflationary pressures created by the collapse of credit markets and sharp cuts in consumer spending will take years to reverse, making a conservative investing strategy the wisest course.
“It will literally take years of fiscal and monetary pump-priming to bring these measures of economic slack to levels that will precipitate the next inflation cycle,” he wrote. “In our view, that is too far beyond the forecasting horizon to be concerned about right now and we expect long Treasurys and any fixed-income instrument with both duration and relative safety attributes to be very compelling at this juncture.”
Can the Obama administration do anything to soothe those concerns and jumpstart the stock market? There is the notion of a so-called “bad bank” that would pull toxic assets out of crippled financial institutions.
Andy Laperriere and Tom Gallagher, policy analysts at ISI Group, point out that valuing these crippled securities is the key to success, and to a credible, well-capitalized banking system that doesn’t have to keep writing off more losses. The government should pay a premium on these assets to avoid a piecemeal approach to nationalization, they said, something a politically strong administration could accomplish in the country’s long-term interests.
“The point of an aggressive policy response,” they wrote, “is not to generate a second-half 2009 recovery as much as it is to avoid a lost decade.” Sphere: Related Content
Monday, January 26, 2009
Shakespeare's lessons for Obama
www.thespectrum.com
St. George, Utah
With the presidential inauguration safely in the history books, the expectations of the nation almost certainly are weighing heavy on the shoulders of its new chief executive. While Barack Obama may have legions of advisors and handlers to help him acclimate to his position, he would also find plenty of worthwhile wisdom concerning the potential pitfalls of power and leadership in William Shakespeare's classic play "Richard II."
As is the case with any classic, the lessons of "Richard II" don't have to be in perfect literal agreement with President Obama's situation to offer valuable insights into the human condition. But it's worth considering a few of the lessons that may be gleaned from this historical classic about a king's internal struggle.
Richard II becomes the King of England as a young man who, upon his coronation, quickly becomes caught up in the perceived majesty of his position. He quickly develops wasteful spending habits and dispenses political favors upon his politically connected friends at the expense of his subjects. His focus becomes fixed upon the influence of his position and the divine right of kings that empowers his every wish.
This belief that his kingly power is derived from above, and therefore beyond reproach, leads him to pursue his own duplicitous desires at the cost of neglecting important kingly duties associated with his office. When his actions are called into question, Richard defends them with the statement, "Am I not King?"
Richard II becomes so enamored with the arbitrary exercise of his power, as opposed to ensuring that his power is being exercised correctly, that he begins to alienate those commoners over whom he rules. He returns from one of his pet wars with Ireland to find that one of the individuals who suffered under his self-serving policies has managed to rally the populace against him and by appealing to and assuming the power that comes from the people, this individual effectively wrests Richard's country and eventually the crown from his control.
The lesson for our new president and for elected leaders at every level can be found in Richard's internal battle to see his kingly power for what it is: a sacred trust with attendant duties to those whom he leads and not as a blank check to do whatever he wishes simply by invoking divine right.
Too often today we see a tendency in those who assume public office to begin regarding themselves as public officials whose job is to rule the people rather than as public servants whose duty is to serve those who elected them. But only an electorate that spends more time at the library than in front of a television screen is likely to appreciate the difference.
Throughout human history, great power has proven to be a stumbling block more often than not. Keeping it in a proper perspective requires an understanding of human nature. As any student of the classics can attest, human nature hasn't changed much since Shakespeare wrote his plays. Sphere: Related Content
St. George, Utah
With the presidential inauguration safely in the history books, the expectations of the nation almost certainly are weighing heavy on the shoulders of its new chief executive. While Barack Obama may have legions of advisors and handlers to help him acclimate to his position, he would also find plenty of worthwhile wisdom concerning the potential pitfalls of power and leadership in William Shakespeare's classic play "Richard II."
As is the case with any classic, the lessons of "Richard II" don't have to be in perfect literal agreement with President Obama's situation to offer valuable insights into the human condition. But it's worth considering a few of the lessons that may be gleaned from this historical classic about a king's internal struggle.
Richard II becomes the King of England as a young man who, upon his coronation, quickly becomes caught up in the perceived majesty of his position. He quickly develops wasteful spending habits and dispenses political favors upon his politically connected friends at the expense of his subjects. His focus becomes fixed upon the influence of his position and the divine right of kings that empowers his every wish.
This belief that his kingly power is derived from above, and therefore beyond reproach, leads him to pursue his own duplicitous desires at the cost of neglecting important kingly duties associated with his office. When his actions are called into question, Richard defends them with the statement, "Am I not King?"
Richard II becomes so enamored with the arbitrary exercise of his power, as opposed to ensuring that his power is being exercised correctly, that he begins to alienate those commoners over whom he rules. He returns from one of his pet wars with Ireland to find that one of the individuals who suffered under his self-serving policies has managed to rally the populace against him and by appealing to and assuming the power that comes from the people, this individual effectively wrests Richard's country and eventually the crown from his control.
The lesson for our new president and for elected leaders at every level can be found in Richard's internal battle to see his kingly power for what it is: a sacred trust with attendant duties to those whom he leads and not as a blank check to do whatever he wishes simply by invoking divine right.
Too often today we see a tendency in those who assume public office to begin regarding themselves as public officials whose job is to rule the people rather than as public servants whose duty is to serve those who elected them. But only an electorate that spends more time at the library than in front of a television screen is likely to appreciate the difference.
Throughout human history, great power has proven to be a stumbling block more often than not. Keeping it in a proper perspective requires an understanding of human nature. As any student of the classics can attest, human nature hasn't changed much since Shakespeare wrote his plays. Sphere: Related Content
Obama urged to listen to Hamas expectations
By Anna Fifield in Rafah, Gaza
Financial Times
Hamas, the Palestinian militant group that controls the Gaza Strip, says it has "high hopes" for the Obama administration and wants to meet George Mitchell, the new US Middle East envoy, when he comes to the region this week.
"We would like him to listen to us and to the Hamas vision, what Hamas expects from this American administration," said Ahmed Yousef, a political adviser to Ismail Haniyeh, the Hamas leader in Gaza and prime minister of the Hamas-run Gaza government.
"We expect fairness and objectivity and even-handedness when they handle this conflict," Mr Yousef told the Financial Times at his house in Rafah, near the Gaza border with Egypt.
President Barack Obama has pledged to renew the US commitment to the Middle East peace process, including a separate Palestinian state alongside Israel. Last week he appointed Mr Mitchell, who led the peace negotiations in Northern Ireland that led to the 1998 Good Friday peace agreement, as his envoy to the region.
Mr Mitchell's most pressing task will be to help shore up the fragile ceasefire that brought the 22-day conflict between Israel and Hamas to a standstill eight days ago. He is expected to hold talks this week with Ehud Olmert, the outgoing Israeli prime minister, and Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president and head of Hamas's rival Fatah party.
Hamas officials have begun talks with Egyptian mediators on extending the one-week ceasefire, which theoretically ended yesterday, but Mr Yousef said the Islamist group would not renew the deal unless Israel opened the borders.
"If the suffering does not end then there can be no ceasefire," he said, adding that if the borders remained closed, then Gaza would still be "in a state of siege, under sanctions" which he said would amount to "a declaration of war".
"We need the borders open for good. Israel must not use this as a way to twist the arm of Hamas," he said, adding that if Israel agreed to open the borders, the group could extend the ceasefire for as long as one year.
Israel withdrew all its remaining troops from the Gaza Strip last week. But it remains deeply concerned that Hamas will attempt to rearm if the borders are opened. Dozens of Israelis living in border regions have been killed by Hamas rockets and mortar shells, including 13 during the war.
Analysts suggested that, in spite of the rhetoric, the group could agree to a ceasefire even if the borders remained closed. Although it still enjoys widespread support in Gaza, Hamas is facing criticism because it fought a deadly war - 1,300 Palestinians were killed and 5,500 injured - without achieving its chief aim of forcing the borders open.
The crossings were closed in 2006 after Hamas - which does not recognise Israel's right to exist and is considered a terrorist organisation by Israel, the US and the European Union - won elections and took control of the Gaza government.
This cut off almost all of Gaza's contact with the outside world and led to more than 100 tunnels being dug under the border with Egypt. Those tunnels have been Gaza's lifeline for the past two years and were bombed during the conflict, although they are now being rebuilt.
Much of the narrow strip, home to 1.5m Palestinians, lies in ruins, and Mr Yousef said Hamas's top priority now was reconstruction, which required raw materials to be brought into Gaza through the crossings.
"Most of the damage happened to the ordinary people, not to the Hamas cadre or their militia machine," Mr Yousef said.
But he said Hamas also placed high priority on "engaging" with the world community and hoped that, under the new US administration, they would see a change in US policy. Sphere: Related Content
Financial Times
Hamas, the Palestinian militant group that controls the Gaza Strip, says it has "high hopes" for the Obama administration and wants to meet George Mitchell, the new US Middle East envoy, when he comes to the region this week.
"We would like him to listen to us and to the Hamas vision, what Hamas expects from this American administration," said Ahmed Yousef, a political adviser to Ismail Haniyeh, the Hamas leader in Gaza and prime minister of the Hamas-run Gaza government.
"We expect fairness and objectivity and even-handedness when they handle this conflict," Mr Yousef told the Financial Times at his house in Rafah, near the Gaza border with Egypt.
President Barack Obama has pledged to renew the US commitment to the Middle East peace process, including a separate Palestinian state alongside Israel. Last week he appointed Mr Mitchell, who led the peace negotiations in Northern Ireland that led to the 1998 Good Friday peace agreement, as his envoy to the region.
Mr Mitchell's most pressing task will be to help shore up the fragile ceasefire that brought the 22-day conflict between Israel and Hamas to a standstill eight days ago. He is expected to hold talks this week with Ehud Olmert, the outgoing Israeli prime minister, and Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president and head of Hamas's rival Fatah party.
Hamas officials have begun talks with Egyptian mediators on extending the one-week ceasefire, which theoretically ended yesterday, but Mr Yousef said the Islamist group would not renew the deal unless Israel opened the borders.
"If the suffering does not end then there can be no ceasefire," he said, adding that if the borders remained closed, then Gaza would still be "in a state of siege, under sanctions" which he said would amount to "a declaration of war".
"We need the borders open for good. Israel must not use this as a way to twist the arm of Hamas," he said, adding that if Israel agreed to open the borders, the group could extend the ceasefire for as long as one year.
Israel withdrew all its remaining troops from the Gaza Strip last week. But it remains deeply concerned that Hamas will attempt to rearm if the borders are opened. Dozens of Israelis living in border regions have been killed by Hamas rockets and mortar shells, including 13 during the war.
Analysts suggested that, in spite of the rhetoric, the group could agree to a ceasefire even if the borders remained closed. Although it still enjoys widespread support in Gaza, Hamas is facing criticism because it fought a deadly war - 1,300 Palestinians were killed and 5,500 injured - without achieving its chief aim of forcing the borders open.
The crossings were closed in 2006 after Hamas - which does not recognise Israel's right to exist and is considered a terrorist organisation by Israel, the US and the European Union - won elections and took control of the Gaza government.
This cut off almost all of Gaza's contact with the outside world and led to more than 100 tunnels being dug under the border with Egypt. Those tunnels have been Gaza's lifeline for the past two years and were bombed during the conflict, although they are now being rebuilt.
Much of the narrow strip, home to 1.5m Palestinians, lies in ruins, and Mr Yousef said Hamas's top priority now was reconstruction, which required raw materials to be brought into Gaza through the crossings.
"Most of the damage happened to the ordinary people, not to the Hamas cadre or their militia machine," Mr Yousef said.
But he said Hamas also placed high priority on "engaging" with the world community and hoped that, under the new US administration, they would see a change in US policy. Sphere: Related Content
OBAMA V POPE:
Senior Vatican figures criticise Obama
PADDY AGNEW in Rome
www.IrishTimes.com
SENIOR VATICAN figures have criticised President Barack Obama on the same day that it was officially confirmed that the Pope had lifted the 1988 excommunication of four traditionalist “Lefebvre” bishops.
On Saturday, Msgr Rino Fisichella and Msgr Elio Sgreccia, two senior figures at the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy for Life, and the Vatican daily, L’Osservatore Romano , were all critical of President Obama’s decision to rescind the so-called “Mexico City Policy”.
This policy banned the granting of US foreign aid to family planning organisations which advocate or provide abortion services.
Introduced by president Reagan in 1984, it was rescinded by president Clinton in 1993 before being reinstated by George W Bush in 2001.
“Of all the good things he could have done, he [President Obama] has chosen the worst. This is a hard blow not just for us Catholics but also for all those who want to fight against the slaughter of the innocents that is brought about through abortion,” said Msgr Sgreccia, president emeritus of the academy.
The concerted Vatican criticism of President Obama contrasts with what, until now, has been the generally warm reception afforded him by Pope Benedict. Since his election victory the pope has sent two telegrams of congratulation to President Obama.
Pope Benedict prompted criticism on Saturday with his decision to lift the 1988 excommunication of four traditionalist “Lefebvre” bishops, members of the Society of St Pius X.
Pointing out that one of the four bishops, Richard Williamson, is a Holocaust denier, Rabbi David Rosen, of the American Jewish Committee, called the pope’s decision “shameful”, adding that it was “a serious blow for Jewish-Vatican relations”.
This article appears in the print edition of the Irish Times Sphere: Related Content
PADDY AGNEW in Rome
www.IrishTimes.com
SENIOR VATICAN figures have criticised President Barack Obama on the same day that it was officially confirmed that the Pope had lifted the 1988 excommunication of four traditionalist “Lefebvre” bishops.
On Saturday, Msgr Rino Fisichella and Msgr Elio Sgreccia, two senior figures at the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy for Life, and the Vatican daily, L’Osservatore Romano , were all critical of President Obama’s decision to rescind the so-called “Mexico City Policy”.
This policy banned the granting of US foreign aid to family planning organisations which advocate or provide abortion services.
Introduced by president Reagan in 1984, it was rescinded by president Clinton in 1993 before being reinstated by George W Bush in 2001.
“Of all the good things he could have done, he [President Obama] has chosen the worst. This is a hard blow not just for us Catholics but also for all those who want to fight against the slaughter of the innocents that is brought about through abortion,” said Msgr Sgreccia, president emeritus of the academy.
The concerted Vatican criticism of President Obama contrasts with what, until now, has been the generally warm reception afforded him by Pope Benedict. Since his election victory the pope has sent two telegrams of congratulation to President Obama.
Pope Benedict prompted criticism on Saturday with his decision to lift the 1988 excommunication of four traditionalist “Lefebvre” bishops, members of the Society of St Pius X.
Pointing out that one of the four bishops, Richard Williamson, is a Holocaust denier, Rabbi David Rosen, of the American Jewish Committee, called the pope’s decision “shameful”, adding that it was “a serious blow for Jewish-Vatican relations”.
This article appears in the print edition of the Irish Times Sphere: Related Content
Funding Restored to Groups That Perform Abortions, Other Care
By Rob Stein and Michael Shear
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, January 24, 2009; Page A03
President Obama yesterday lifted a ban on U.S. funding for international health groups that perform abortions, promote legalizing the procedure or provide counseling about terminating pregnancies.
Obama issued a memorandum rescinding the Mexico City Policy, also known as the "global gag rule," which President Ronald Reagan originally instituted in 1984, President Bill Clinton reversed in 1993 and President George W. Bush revived in 2001.
The memorandum revokes Bush's order, calling the limitations on funding "excessively broad" and adding that "they have undermined efforts to promote safe and effective voluntary family programs in foreign nations." In an accompanying statement, Obama said he would also work with Congress to restore U.S. funding support for the United Nations Population Fund "to reduce poverty, improve the health of women and children, prevent HIV/AIDS and provide family planning assistance to women in 154 countries."
Obama's decision was praised by family planning groups, women's health advocates and others for allowing the U.S. Agency for International Development to once again provide millions of dollars to programs offering medical services, birth control, HIV prevention and other care.
"For eight long years, the global gag rule has been used by the Bush administration to play politics with the lives of poor women across the world," said Gill Greer of the International Planned Parenthood Federation in London.
The decision marked Obama's latest break with his predecessor. The order Bush signed reviving the policy was the first of his administration and was signed on his first day in office, whereas Obama's first -- signed Thursday -- ordered the closure of the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba.
The decision also appeared to be another sign of Obama's attempts try to bridge even the widest political divides. Obama signed the order one day later than had been expected -- avoiding the confrontational step of doing so on the same day that thousands of abortion opponents participated in a March for Life on the Mall to protest the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion in the United States.
Jim Wallis of the progressive evangelical group Sojourners praised Obama for not signing the order on the day of the march and instead marking the day by issuing his first presidential statement about abortion, which called on all sides to find common ground, such as working to reduce abortions.
"President Obama showed respect for both sides in the historically polarized abortion debate, and called for both a new conversation and a new common ground. I hope that this important gesture signals the beginning of a new approach and a new path toward finding some real solutions to decrease the number of abortions in this country and around the world," Wallis said.
The rescission order was signed late in the day yesterday without any reporters, news photographers or television cameras present, in marked contrast to elaborate ceremonies highlighting orders Obama signed earlier in the week.
Nevertheless, the move was condemned by members of Congress opposed to abortion and by leading antiabortion groups.
"Yesterday, President Obama issued executive orders banning the torture of terrorists but today signed an order that exports the torture of unborn children around the world," said Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council.
Abortion rights advocates are also pushing to increase funding for reproductive health programs, to cut funding for sex education programs that focus on abstinence, and to reverse a recently implemented Health and Human Services regulation that protects health-care workers who object to providing any care they consider objectionable, including abortion.
"We look forward to working with President Obama on common-sense policies such as reversing Bush's midnight HHS rule, funding comprehensive sex education to keep our teens healthy, and increasing access to affordable family planning that help prevent unintended and teen pregnancies and lead to healthy outcomes for women," said Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.
Lifting the Mexico City Policy would not permit U.S. tax dollars to be used for abortions, but it would allow funding to resume to groups that provide other services, including counseling about abortions. Sphere: Related Content
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, January 24, 2009; Page A03
President Obama yesterday lifted a ban on U.S. funding for international health groups that perform abortions, promote legalizing the procedure or provide counseling about terminating pregnancies.
Obama issued a memorandum rescinding the Mexico City Policy, also known as the "global gag rule," which President Ronald Reagan originally instituted in 1984, President Bill Clinton reversed in 1993 and President George W. Bush revived in 2001.
The memorandum revokes Bush's order, calling the limitations on funding "excessively broad" and adding that "they have undermined efforts to promote safe and effective voluntary family programs in foreign nations." In an accompanying statement, Obama said he would also work with Congress to restore U.S. funding support for the United Nations Population Fund "to reduce poverty, improve the health of women and children, prevent HIV/AIDS and provide family planning assistance to women in 154 countries."
Obama's decision was praised by family planning groups, women's health advocates and others for allowing the U.S. Agency for International Development to once again provide millions of dollars to programs offering medical services, birth control, HIV prevention and other care.
"For eight long years, the global gag rule has been used by the Bush administration to play politics with the lives of poor women across the world," said Gill Greer of the International Planned Parenthood Federation in London.
The decision marked Obama's latest break with his predecessor. The order Bush signed reviving the policy was the first of his administration and was signed on his first day in office, whereas Obama's first -- signed Thursday -- ordered the closure of the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba.
The decision also appeared to be another sign of Obama's attempts try to bridge even the widest political divides. Obama signed the order one day later than had been expected -- avoiding the confrontational step of doing so on the same day that thousands of abortion opponents participated in a March for Life on the Mall to protest the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion in the United States.
Jim Wallis of the progressive evangelical group Sojourners praised Obama for not signing the order on the day of the march and instead marking the day by issuing his first presidential statement about abortion, which called on all sides to find common ground, such as working to reduce abortions.
"President Obama showed respect for both sides in the historically polarized abortion debate, and called for both a new conversation and a new common ground. I hope that this important gesture signals the beginning of a new approach and a new path toward finding some real solutions to decrease the number of abortions in this country and around the world," Wallis said.
The rescission order was signed late in the day yesterday without any reporters, news photographers or television cameras present, in marked contrast to elaborate ceremonies highlighting orders Obama signed earlier in the week.
Nevertheless, the move was condemned by members of Congress opposed to abortion and by leading antiabortion groups.
"Yesterday, President Obama issued executive orders banning the torture of terrorists but today signed an order that exports the torture of unborn children around the world," said Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council.
Abortion rights advocates are also pushing to increase funding for reproductive health programs, to cut funding for sex education programs that focus on abstinence, and to reverse a recently implemented Health and Human Services regulation that protects health-care workers who object to providing any care they consider objectionable, including abortion.
"We look forward to working with President Obama on common-sense policies such as reversing Bush's midnight HHS rule, funding comprehensive sex education to keep our teens healthy, and increasing access to affordable family planning that help prevent unintended and teen pregnancies and lead to healthy outcomes for women," said Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.
Lifting the Mexico City Policy would not permit U.S. tax dollars to be used for abortions, but it would allow funding to resume to groups that provide other services, including counseling about abortions. Sphere: Related Content
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Ice Cream and the Election
This was one of those anonymous forwards that was sent to me. While I normally don't post them, I'm making an exception in this case.
Ice Cream & The Election
Excellent analogy!
From a teacher in the Nashville area.
Who worries about "the cow" when it is all about the "Ice Cream?"
The most eye-opening civics lesson I ever had was while teaching third grade this year. The presidential election was heating up and some of the children showed an interest. I decided we would have an election for a class president. We would choose our nominees. They would make a campaign speech and the class would vote. To simplify the process, candidates were nominated by other class members.
We discussed what kinds of characteristics these students should have. We got many nominations and from those, Jamie and Olivia were picked to run for the top spot. The class had done a great job in their selections. Both candidates were good kids. I thought Jamie might have an advantage because he got lots of parental support. I had never seen Olivia's mother.
The day arrived when they were to make their speeches Jamie went first. He had specific ideas about how to make our class a better place. He ended by promising to do his very best.
Everyone applauded. He sat down and Olivia came to the podium. Her speech was concise. She said, "If you will vote for me, I will give you ice cream." She sat down. The class went wild. "Yes! Yes! We want ice cream." She surely could say more. She did not have to.
A discussion followed. How did she plan to pay for the ice cream? Shewasn't sure. Would her parents buy it or would the class pay for it? She didn't know. The class really didn't care. All they were thinking about was icecream. Jamie was forgotten.
Olivia won by a landslide.
Every time Barack Obama opened his mouth he offered ice cream andfifty-two percent of the people reacted like nine year olds. They wantice cream. The other forty-eight percent of us know we're going to have to feed the cow and clean up the mess. Sphere: Related Content
Ice Cream & The Election
Excellent analogy!
From a teacher in the Nashville area.
Who worries about "the cow" when it is all about the "Ice Cream?"
The most eye-opening civics lesson I ever had was while teaching third grade this year. The presidential election was heating up and some of the children showed an interest. I decided we would have an election for a class president. We would choose our nominees. They would make a campaign speech and the class would vote. To simplify the process, candidates were nominated by other class members.
We discussed what kinds of characteristics these students should have. We got many nominations and from those, Jamie and Olivia were picked to run for the top spot. The class had done a great job in their selections. Both candidates were good kids. I thought Jamie might have an advantage because he got lots of parental support. I had never seen Olivia's mother.
The day arrived when they were to make their speeches Jamie went first. He had specific ideas about how to make our class a better place. He ended by promising to do his very best.
Everyone applauded. He sat down and Olivia came to the podium. Her speech was concise. She said, "If you will vote for me, I will give you ice cream." She sat down. The class went wild. "Yes! Yes! We want ice cream." She surely could say more. She did not have to.
A discussion followed. How did she plan to pay for the ice cream? Shewasn't sure. Would her parents buy it or would the class pay for it? She didn't know. The class really didn't care. All they were thinking about was icecream. Jamie was forgotten.
Olivia won by a landslide.
Every time Barack Obama opened his mouth he offered ice cream andfifty-two percent of the people reacted like nine year olds. They wantice cream. The other forty-eight percent of us know we're going to have to feed the cow and clean up the mess. Sphere: Related Content
Rasmussen: Consumer Confidence Falls for Fourth Straight Day
Information obtained from www.rasmussenreports.com
Consumer confidence bounced up early last week around the time of Barack Obama’s inauguration as President, but the bounce has faded.
The Rasmussen Consumer Index, which measures the economic confidence of consumers on a daily basis, fell for the fourth straight day on Sunday. At 60.2, the Index is down a point from yesterday and little changed from a week ago. Consumer confidence continues to hover just a few points above the all-time lows set in mid-December.
The Rasmussen Investor Index also fell on Sunday, dropping a point-and-a-half to 65.5. The Investor Index is up four points from a week ago.
Eight percent (8%) of consumers rate the U.S. economy as good or excellent, a view shared by 7% of investors. Sixty-four percent (64%) of both consumers and investors say that the economy is in poor shape.
A related survey found that 48% of Americans believe that America’s best days are still to come while 35% say they have come and gone.
Please sign up for the Rasmussen Reports daily e-mail update (it’s free)… let us keep you up to date with the latest public opinion news.
Full month data for December shows confidence setting a record all-time low for the seventh time in the last ten months. The Discover U.S. Spending Monitor also fell to a record low in December. One-third (34 percent) of consumers plan to spend less in January. This compares to 22 percent in November and just 24 percent from a year ago.
The Rasmussen Consumer Index and Investor Index are derived from nightly telephone surveys of 500 adults and reported on a three-day rolling average basis. The baseline for the Index was established at 100.0 in October 2001. Readings above 100.0 indicate that confidence is higher than in the baseline month. Detailed supplemental information is available for Premium Members. Historical data for the Consumer and Investor indexes as well as attitudes about the economy and personal finances are also available to Premium Members.
The Rasmussen Consumer Index reached its highest level ever at 127.0 on January 6, 2004. The all-time low was reached on December 17, 2008 at 56.8.
The Rasmussen Investor Index reached its highest level ever at 150.9 on January 7, 2004. The lowest level ever measured was 58.5 on December 16, 2008.
The baseline for the Rasmussen Consumer Index was established at 100.0 in October 2001. At 60.2, the overall levels of economic confidence are significantly lower today than they were in the aftermath of the 9-11 terrorist attacks.
Rasmussen Reports is an electronic publishing firm specializing in the collection, publication, and distribution of public opinion polling information.
The Rasmussen Reports ElectionEdge™ Premium Service for Election 2008 offers the most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a Presidential election.
Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, has been an independent pollster for more than a decade.
The current Index data is from a national telephone survey of 1,500 adults conducted by Rasmussen Reports over the past three nights. The margin of sampling error for each individual question in the survey is +/- 2.6 percentage points, with a 95% level of confidence. This survey is part of a larger series of data used to compile the Rasmussen Index on a daily basis. Sphere: Related Content
Consumer confidence bounced up early last week around the time of Barack Obama’s inauguration as President, but the bounce has faded.
The Rasmussen Consumer Index, which measures the economic confidence of consumers on a daily basis, fell for the fourth straight day on Sunday. At 60.2, the Index is down a point from yesterday and little changed from a week ago. Consumer confidence continues to hover just a few points above the all-time lows set in mid-December.
The Rasmussen Investor Index also fell on Sunday, dropping a point-and-a-half to 65.5. The Investor Index is up four points from a week ago.
Eight percent (8%) of consumers rate the U.S. economy as good or excellent, a view shared by 7% of investors. Sixty-four percent (64%) of both consumers and investors say that the economy is in poor shape.
A related survey found that 48% of Americans believe that America’s best days are still to come while 35% say they have come and gone.
Please sign up for the Rasmussen Reports daily e-mail update (it’s free)… let us keep you up to date with the latest public opinion news.
Full month data for December shows confidence setting a record all-time low for the seventh time in the last ten months. The Discover U.S. Spending Monitor also fell to a record low in December. One-third (34 percent) of consumers plan to spend less in January. This compares to 22 percent in November and just 24 percent from a year ago.
The Rasmussen Consumer Index and Investor Index are derived from nightly telephone surveys of 500 adults and reported on a three-day rolling average basis. The baseline for the Index was established at 100.0 in October 2001. Readings above 100.0 indicate that confidence is higher than in the baseline month. Detailed supplemental information is available for Premium Members. Historical data for the Consumer and Investor indexes as well as attitudes about the economy and personal finances are also available to Premium Members.
The Rasmussen Consumer Index reached its highest level ever at 127.0 on January 6, 2004. The all-time low was reached on December 17, 2008 at 56.8.
The Rasmussen Investor Index reached its highest level ever at 150.9 on January 7, 2004. The lowest level ever measured was 58.5 on December 16, 2008.
The baseline for the Rasmussen Consumer Index was established at 100.0 in October 2001. At 60.2, the overall levels of economic confidence are significantly lower today than they were in the aftermath of the 9-11 terrorist attacks.
Rasmussen Reports is an electronic publishing firm specializing in the collection, publication, and distribution of public opinion polling information.
The Rasmussen Reports ElectionEdge™ Premium Service for Election 2008 offers the most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a Presidential election.
Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, has been an independent pollster for more than a decade.
The current Index data is from a national telephone survey of 1,500 adults conducted by Rasmussen Reports over the past three nights. The margin of sampling error for each individual question in the survey is +/- 2.6 percentage points, with a 95% level of confidence. This survey is part of a larger series of data used to compile the Rasmussen Index on a daily basis. Sphere: Related Content
HOW Much is Michelle Obama's wardrobe worth?
Seems to me I remember hearing a lot of criticism over Gov. Sarah Palin's wardrobe from the Republican National Convention. For Michelle Obama, we already have $2,100 spent for the Inauguation Day look, and $7,000 for the Inauguration Night look (plus extra for accessories). Was taxpayer money spent on such lavishness? How much was spent total on Michelle Obama's wardrobe? I think Americans have the right to know.
MICHELLE OBAMA'S INAUGURATION DAY LOOK
Dress and matching coat by Isabel Toledo. A spring version will retail for about $1,500 at Barneys.
Leather gloves from J. Crew: probably about $100.
Jimmy Choo shoes. Probably about $500. (Photo on right by Jud McCrehin/USA Today)
(Information below obtained from the Detroit Free Press- http://www.freep.com/)
So, you loved Michelle Obama's inaugural style. Loved the yellow or citron or lemongrass or whatever color you want to call it dress and jacket she wore to the swearing-in ceremony? Loved the one-shoulder evening gown she wore to the balls? Me, too! But while I can often afford something from J. Crew, I simply cannot afford designer dresses or gowns. And odds are, most of you can't -- or don't want to -- either. So, you may be delighted to know that knock-offs of her winter white evening gown will be in stores by prom season. You can even pre-order one at www.edressme.com. And lots of stores carry the sheath-style dresses that Obama has made her fashion trademark. Read on for how we achieved Obama's day and evening looks for less.
MICHELLE OBAMA'S INAUGURATION DAY LOOKDress and matching coat by Isabel Toledo. A spring version will retail for about $1,500 at Barneys.
Leather gloves from J. Crew: probably about $100.
Jimmy Choo shoes. Probably about $500. (Photo on right by Jud McCrehin/USA Today)
MICHELLE OBAMA'S INAUGURATION NIGHT LOOK
One-shoulder winter white evening gown with organza floral details and silver threading custom-made by Jason Wu: Price unknown, but his gowns can cost up to $6,000.
Jewelry — diamond earrings, diamond ring and diamond bracelets: $1,000s. (Photo at left by Pablo Monsavais/AP)
Jewelry — diamond earrings, diamond ring and diamond bracelets: $1,000s. (Photo at left by Pablo Monsavais/AP)
One-shoulder white gown with flower sequin embellishments. $320 at http://www.edressme.com/
Tiered crystal chandelier earrings by Nadri, $138 at all local Nordstrom stores. To find a store or to buy these earrings online: www.nordstrom.com
Sphere: Related Content
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Old Web Prank Links ‘Obama’ With ‘Failure’
By Miguel Helft
New York Times
A five-year-old online prank that mocked President Bush is now aiming its snarkiness at Barack Obama.
Search for “failure” on Google or “miserable failure” on Yahoo’s or Microsoft’s search engines, and the top result you’ll get is likely to be a link to a biography of President Obama on the official Whitehouse.gov Web site. Before the inauguration, those searches linked to a biography of President Bush.
Search engine experts said Mr. Obama is now the butt of the online joke because his Web team failed to clean up a jumble of links left behind by Mr. Bush’s crew. The White House press office did not immediately return a call seeking comment.
The prank began in 2003, when a blogger angry at Mr. Bush encouraged his readers to link the words “miserable failure” on their own Web sites to Mr. Bush’s official biography on the Web. Google interprets incoming links on the Web as votes that establish the popularity of a page and its relevancy to a certain query. The prank worked, as Google began interpreting searches for “miserable failure” as requests to see the official biography of George W. Bush.
Although techies call this kind of prank a “Google bomb,” it tends to work on other search engines like Yahoo and Microsoft, because they use a similar method to rank pages.
Google attempted to neuter the prank in 2007 but was only partly successful. Earlier, the Bush White House tried as well, but its efforts were clumsy. It moved Mr. Bush’s biography to newly created page. But it also “redirected” requests for the page that hosted the old Bush biography to a page typically used by the office of the president, not a single president. As a result, searches for “miserable failure” pointed to that page.
Danny Sullivan, a search expert who has followed the prank since its inception, used his blog, Search Engine Land, earlier this month to urge Mr. Bush to fix the problem before he left office. He also wrote detailed instructions for how to do so. Mr. Bush’s team did nothing. And in building the new Whitehouse.gov site, the Obama team appears to have, in essence, mirrored the Bush-era redirection snafu, which now sends users to a biography of the current office holder.
“When it comes to search engine stuff, they haven’t demonstrated that they are on top of it,” Mr. Sullivan said in an interview. “This is a stumble.” Sphere: Related Content
New York Times
A five-year-old online prank that mocked President Bush is now aiming its snarkiness at Barack Obama.
Search for “failure” on Google or “miserable failure” on Yahoo’s or Microsoft’s search engines, and the top result you’ll get is likely to be a link to a biography of President Obama on the official Whitehouse.gov Web site. Before the inauguration, those searches linked to a biography of President Bush.
Search engine experts said Mr. Obama is now the butt of the online joke because his Web team failed to clean up a jumble of links left behind by Mr. Bush’s crew. The White House press office did not immediately return a call seeking comment.
The prank began in 2003, when a blogger angry at Mr. Bush encouraged his readers to link the words “miserable failure” on their own Web sites to Mr. Bush’s official biography on the Web. Google interprets incoming links on the Web as votes that establish the popularity of a page and its relevancy to a certain query. The prank worked, as Google began interpreting searches for “miserable failure” as requests to see the official biography of George W. Bush.
Although techies call this kind of prank a “Google bomb,” it tends to work on other search engines like Yahoo and Microsoft, because they use a similar method to rank pages.
Google attempted to neuter the prank in 2007 but was only partly successful. Earlier, the Bush White House tried as well, but its efforts were clumsy. It moved Mr. Bush’s biography to newly created page. But it also “redirected” requests for the page that hosted the old Bush biography to a page typically used by the office of the president, not a single president. As a result, searches for “miserable failure” pointed to that page.
Danny Sullivan, a search expert who has followed the prank since its inception, used his blog, Search Engine Land, earlier this month to urge Mr. Bush to fix the problem before he left office. He also wrote detailed instructions for how to do so. Mr. Bush’s team did nothing. And in building the new Whitehouse.gov site, the Obama team appears to have, in essence, mirrored the Bush-era redirection snafu, which now sends users to a biography of the current office holder.
“When it comes to search engine stuff, they haven’t demonstrated that they are on top of it,” Mr. Sullivan said in an interview. “This is a stumble.” Sphere: Related Content
Friday, January 23, 2009
AP: Obama reverses Bush abortion-funds policy
By MATTHEW LEE and LIZ SIDOTI
Associated Press Writers
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama on Friday struck down the Bush administration's ban on giving federal money to international groups that perform abortions or provide abortion information — an inflammatory policy that has bounced in and out of law for the past quarter-century.
Obama's move, the latest in an aggressive first week reversing contentious Bush policies, was warmly welcomed by liberal groups and denounced by abortion rights foes.
The ban has been a political football between Democratic and Republican administrations since GOP President Ronald Reagan first adopted it 1984. Democrat Bill Clinton ended the ban in 1993, but Republican George W. Bush re-instituted it in 2001 as one of his first acts in office.
"For too long, international family planning assistance has been used as a political wedge issue, the subject of a back and forth debate that has served only to divide us," Obama said in a statement released by the White House. "I have no desire to continue this stale and fruitless debate."
He said the ban was unnecessarily broad and undermined family planning in developing countries.
"In the coming weeks, my administration will initiate a fresh conversation on family planning, working to find areas of common ground to best meet the needs of women and families at home and around the world," the president said.
Obama issued the presidential memorandum rescinding the Bush policy without coverage by the media, late Friday afternoon. The abortion measure is a highly emotional one for many people, and the quiet signing was in contrast to the televised coverage of Obama's announcement Wednesday on ethics rules and Thursday's signing of orders on closing the Guantanamo Bay prison camp and banning torture in the questioning of terror suspects.
His action came one day after the 36th anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court ruling in Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion.
The Bush policy had banned U.S. taxpayer money, usually in the form of Agency for International Development funds, from going to international family planning groups that either offer abortions or provide information, counseling or referrals about abortion as a family planning method.
Critics have long held that the rule unfairly discriminates against the world's poor by denying U.S. aid to groups that may be involved in abortion but also work on other aspects of reproductive health care and HIV/AIDS, leading to the closure of free and low-cost rural clinics.
Supporters of the ban say that the United States still provides millions of dollars in family planning assistance around the world and that the rule prevents anti-abortion taxpayers from backing something they believe is morally wrong.
The ban has been known as the "Mexico City policy" for the city a U.S. delegation first announced it at a U.N. International Conference on Population.
Both Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who will oversee foreign aid, had promised to do away with the rule during the presidential campaign.
Clinton said Friday evening that for seven years Bush's policy made it more difficult for women around the world to gain access to essential information and health care services. "Rather than limiting women's ability to receive reproductive health services, we should be supporting programs that help women and their partners make decisions to ensure their health and the health of their families," Clinton said.
In a related move, Obama also said he would restore funding to the U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA). Both he and Clinton had pledged to reverse a Bush administration determination that assistance to the organization violated U.S. law known as the Kemp-Kasten amendment.
Obama, in his statement, said he looked forward to working with Congress to fulfill that promise: "By resuming funding to UNFPA, the U.S. will be joining 180 other donor nations working collaboratively to reduce poverty, improve the health of women and children, prevent HIV/AIDS and provide family planning assistance to women in 154 countries."
Thoraya Ahmed Obaid, executive director of the U.N. Population Fund, said: "The president's actions send a strong message about his leadership and his desire to support causes that will promote peace and dignity, equality for women and girls and economic development in the poorest regions of the world."
"We are confident that under the new president's direction, the U.S. will resume its leadership in promoting and protecting women's reproductive health and rights worldwide," Obaid said in a statement issued at U.N. headquarters in New York.
The Bush administration had barred U.S. money from the fund, contending that its work in China supported a Chinese family planning policy of coercive abortion and involuntary sterilization. UNFPA has vehemently denied that it does.
Congress had appropriated $40 million to the UNFPA in the past budget year, but the administration had withheld the money as it had done every year since 2002.
Organizations and lawmakers that had pressed Obama to rescind the Mexico City policy were jubilant.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the move "will help save lives and empower the poorest women and families to improve their quality of life and their future."
"Today's announcement is a very powerful signal to our neighbors around the world that the United States is once again back in the business of good public policy and ideology no longer blunts our ability to save lives around the globe," said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Population Action International, an advocacy group, said that the policy had "severely impacted" women's health and that the step "will help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies, abortions and women dying from high-risk pregnancies because they don't have access to family planning."
Anti-abortion groups and lawmakers condemned Obama's decision.
"I have long supported the Mexico City Policy and believe this administration's decision to be counter to our nation's interests," said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.
"Coming just one day after the 36th anniversary of the tragic Roe v. Wade decision, this presidential directive forces taxpayers to subsidize abortions overseas — something no American should be required by government to do," said House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio.
Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., called it "morally wrong to take the taxpayer dollars of millions of pro-life Americans to promote abortion around the world."
"President Obama not long ago told the American people that he would support policies to reduce abortions, but today he is effectively guaranteeing more abortions by funding groups that promote abortion as a method of population control," said Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee. Sphere: Related Content
Associated Press Writers
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama on Friday struck down the Bush administration's ban on giving federal money to international groups that perform abortions or provide abortion information — an inflammatory policy that has bounced in and out of law for the past quarter-century.
Obama's move, the latest in an aggressive first week reversing contentious Bush policies, was warmly welcomed by liberal groups and denounced by abortion rights foes.
The ban has been a political football between Democratic and Republican administrations since GOP President Ronald Reagan first adopted it 1984. Democrat Bill Clinton ended the ban in 1993, but Republican George W. Bush re-instituted it in 2001 as one of his first acts in office.
"For too long, international family planning assistance has been used as a political wedge issue, the subject of a back and forth debate that has served only to divide us," Obama said in a statement released by the White House. "I have no desire to continue this stale and fruitless debate."
He said the ban was unnecessarily broad and undermined family planning in developing countries.
"In the coming weeks, my administration will initiate a fresh conversation on family planning, working to find areas of common ground to best meet the needs of women and families at home and around the world," the president said.
Obama issued the presidential memorandum rescinding the Bush policy without coverage by the media, late Friday afternoon. The abortion measure is a highly emotional one for many people, and the quiet signing was in contrast to the televised coverage of Obama's announcement Wednesday on ethics rules and Thursday's signing of orders on closing the Guantanamo Bay prison camp and banning torture in the questioning of terror suspects.
His action came one day after the 36th anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court ruling in Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion.
The Bush policy had banned U.S. taxpayer money, usually in the form of Agency for International Development funds, from going to international family planning groups that either offer abortions or provide information, counseling or referrals about abortion as a family planning method.
Critics have long held that the rule unfairly discriminates against the world's poor by denying U.S. aid to groups that may be involved in abortion but also work on other aspects of reproductive health care and HIV/AIDS, leading to the closure of free and low-cost rural clinics.
Supporters of the ban say that the United States still provides millions of dollars in family planning assistance around the world and that the rule prevents anti-abortion taxpayers from backing something they believe is morally wrong.
The ban has been known as the "Mexico City policy" for the city a U.S. delegation first announced it at a U.N. International Conference on Population.
Both Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who will oversee foreign aid, had promised to do away with the rule during the presidential campaign.
Clinton said Friday evening that for seven years Bush's policy made it more difficult for women around the world to gain access to essential information and health care services. "Rather than limiting women's ability to receive reproductive health services, we should be supporting programs that help women and their partners make decisions to ensure their health and the health of their families," Clinton said.
In a related move, Obama also said he would restore funding to the U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA). Both he and Clinton had pledged to reverse a Bush administration determination that assistance to the organization violated U.S. law known as the Kemp-Kasten amendment.
Obama, in his statement, said he looked forward to working with Congress to fulfill that promise: "By resuming funding to UNFPA, the U.S. will be joining 180 other donor nations working collaboratively to reduce poverty, improve the health of women and children, prevent HIV/AIDS and provide family planning assistance to women in 154 countries."
Thoraya Ahmed Obaid, executive director of the U.N. Population Fund, said: "The president's actions send a strong message about his leadership and his desire to support causes that will promote peace and dignity, equality for women and girls and economic development in the poorest regions of the world."
"We are confident that under the new president's direction, the U.S. will resume its leadership in promoting and protecting women's reproductive health and rights worldwide," Obaid said in a statement issued at U.N. headquarters in New York.
The Bush administration had barred U.S. money from the fund, contending that its work in China supported a Chinese family planning policy of coercive abortion and involuntary sterilization. UNFPA has vehemently denied that it does.
Congress had appropriated $40 million to the UNFPA in the past budget year, but the administration had withheld the money as it had done every year since 2002.
Organizations and lawmakers that had pressed Obama to rescind the Mexico City policy were jubilant.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the move "will help save lives and empower the poorest women and families to improve their quality of life and their future."
"Today's announcement is a very powerful signal to our neighbors around the world that the United States is once again back in the business of good public policy and ideology no longer blunts our ability to save lives around the globe," said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Population Action International, an advocacy group, said that the policy had "severely impacted" women's health and that the step "will help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies, abortions and women dying from high-risk pregnancies because they don't have access to family planning."
Anti-abortion groups and lawmakers condemned Obama's decision.
"I have long supported the Mexico City Policy and believe this administration's decision to be counter to our nation's interests," said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.
"Coming just one day after the 36th anniversary of the tragic Roe v. Wade decision, this presidential directive forces taxpayers to subsidize abortions overseas — something no American should be required by government to do," said House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio.
Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., called it "morally wrong to take the taxpayer dollars of millions of pro-life Americans to promote abortion around the world."
"President Obama not long ago told the American people that he would support policies to reduce abortions, but today he is effectively guaranteeing more abortions by funding groups that promote abortion as a method of population control," said Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee. Sphere: Related Content
Pence introduces Abortion Provider Prohibition Act
Congressman Mike Pence (R-IN) introduced the H.R. 61 into the House of Representatives prohibiting family planning grants from being awarded to any entity that performs abortions. He has already picked up 61 co-sponsors. Will Nancy Pelosi allow this to be heard before the whole House? Will President Obama veto this?
If you support this concept, and your representative is not listed here, please contact them and voice your support.
Here is the full text of the pending legislation.
HR 614 IH 111th CONGRESS 1st Session
H. R. 614
To amend title X of the Public Health Service Act to prohibit family planning grants from being awarded to any entity that performs abortions, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 21, 2009
Mr. PENCE (for himself, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. PITTS, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. WESTMORELAND, Mr. COLE, Mr. SENSENBRENNER, Mr. TERRY, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. INGLIS, Mr. HALL of Texas, Mrs. SCHMIDT, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. PAUL, Mr. LAMBORN, Mr. FLAKE, Mr. HOEKSTRA, Mr. FORTENBERRY, Mr. MILLER of Florida, Mr. TIAHRT, Mr. BOOZMAN, Mr. SHUSTER, Mr. BROWN of South Carolina, Mrs. BACHMANN, Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, Mr. MCCAUL, Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin, Mr. SCALISE, Mr. ROGERS of Alabama, Mr. BARTLETT, Mr. POE of Texas, Mr. HERGER, Mr. BACHUS, Mr. NEUGEBAUER, Mr. AKIN, Mrs. MCMORRIS RODGERS, Mr. OLSON, Mr. KLINE of Minnesota, Mr. KING of Iowa, Mr. FLEMING, Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina, Mr. MCKEON, Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania, Mr. HARPER, Ms. LUMMIS, Mr. CHAFFETZ, Mr. MCHENRY, Mr. BROUN of Georgia, Ms. FALLIN, Mr. BRADY of Texas, Ms. FOXX, Mr. GINGREY of Georgia, Mr. CASSIDY, Mr. LINDER, Mr. DAVIS of Tennessee, Mr. SOUDER, Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky, Mr. JORDAN of Ohio, Mr. ROE of Tennessee, Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey, Mr. BISHOP of Utah, and Mr. MCCLINTOCK) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce
A BILL
To amend title X of the Public Health Service Act to prohibit family planning grants from being awarded to any entity that performs abortions, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act'.
SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON ABORTION.
Title X of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
`SEC. 1009. ADDITIONAL PROHIBITION REGARDING ABORTION.
`(a) Prohibition- The Secretary shall not provide any assistance under this title to an entity unless the entity certifies that, during the period of such assistance, the entity will not perform, and will not provide any funds to any other entity that performs, an abortion.
`(b) Exception- Subsection (a) does not apply with respect to an abortion where--
`(1) the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape, or an act of incest against a minor; or
`(2) a physician certifies that the woman suffers from a physical disorder, physical injury, or physical illness that would place the woman in danger of death unless an abortion is performed, including a life-threatening physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself.
`(c) Hospitals- Subsection (a) does not apply with respect to a hospital, so long as such hospital does not, during the period of assistance described in subsection (a), provide funds to any non-hospital entity that performs an abortion (other than an abortion described in subsection (b)).
`(d) Annual Report- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of the Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act, and annually thereafter, for the fiscal year involved, the Secretary shall submit a report to the Congress containing--
`(1) a list of each entity receiving a grant under this title;
`(2) for each such entity performing abortions under the exceptions described in subsection (b)-
`(A) the total number of such abortions;
`(B) the number of such abortions where the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape;
`(C) the number of such abortions where the pregnancy is the result of an act of incest against a minor; and
`(D) the number of such abortions where a physician provides a certification described in subsection (b)(2);
`(3) a statement of the date of the latest certification under subsection (a) for each entity receiving a grant under this title; and
`(4) a list of each entity to which an entity described in paragraph (1) makes available funds received through a grant under this title.
`(e) Definitions- In this section:
`(1) The term `entity' means the entire legal entity, including any entity that controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with such entity.
`(2) The term `hospital' has the meaning given to such term in section 1861(e) of the Social Security Act.'. Sphere: Related Content
If you support this concept, and your representative is not listed here, please contact them and voice your support.
Here is the full text of the pending legislation.
HR 614 IH 111th CONGRESS 1st Session
H. R. 614
To amend title X of the Public Health Service Act to prohibit family planning grants from being awarded to any entity that performs abortions, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 21, 2009
Mr. PENCE (for himself, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. PITTS, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. WESTMORELAND, Mr. COLE, Mr. SENSENBRENNER, Mr. TERRY, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. INGLIS, Mr. HALL of Texas, Mrs. SCHMIDT, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. PAUL, Mr. LAMBORN, Mr. FLAKE, Mr. HOEKSTRA, Mr. FORTENBERRY, Mr. MILLER of Florida, Mr. TIAHRT, Mr. BOOZMAN, Mr. SHUSTER, Mr. BROWN of South Carolina, Mrs. BACHMANN, Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, Mr. MCCAUL, Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin, Mr. SCALISE, Mr. ROGERS of Alabama, Mr. BARTLETT, Mr. POE of Texas, Mr. HERGER, Mr. BACHUS, Mr. NEUGEBAUER, Mr. AKIN, Mrs. MCMORRIS RODGERS, Mr. OLSON, Mr. KLINE of Minnesota, Mr. KING of Iowa, Mr. FLEMING, Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina, Mr. MCKEON, Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania, Mr. HARPER, Ms. LUMMIS, Mr. CHAFFETZ, Mr. MCHENRY, Mr. BROUN of Georgia, Ms. FALLIN, Mr. BRADY of Texas, Ms. FOXX, Mr. GINGREY of Georgia, Mr. CASSIDY, Mr. LINDER, Mr. DAVIS of Tennessee, Mr. SOUDER, Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky, Mr. JORDAN of Ohio, Mr. ROE of Tennessee, Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey, Mr. BISHOP of Utah, and Mr. MCCLINTOCK) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce
A BILL
To amend title X of the Public Health Service Act to prohibit family planning grants from being awarded to any entity that performs abortions, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act'.
SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON ABORTION.
Title X of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
`SEC. 1009. ADDITIONAL PROHIBITION REGARDING ABORTION.
`(a) Prohibition- The Secretary shall not provide any assistance under this title to an entity unless the entity certifies that, during the period of such assistance, the entity will not perform, and will not provide any funds to any other entity that performs, an abortion.
`(b) Exception- Subsection (a) does not apply with respect to an abortion where--
`(1) the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape, or an act of incest against a minor; or
`(2) a physician certifies that the woman suffers from a physical disorder, physical injury, or physical illness that would place the woman in danger of death unless an abortion is performed, including a life-threatening physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself.
`(c) Hospitals- Subsection (a) does not apply with respect to a hospital, so long as such hospital does not, during the period of assistance described in subsection (a), provide funds to any non-hospital entity that performs an abortion (other than an abortion described in subsection (b)).
`(d) Annual Report- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of the Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act, and annually thereafter, for the fiscal year involved, the Secretary shall submit a report to the Congress containing--
`(1) a list of each entity receiving a grant under this title;
`(2) for each such entity performing abortions under the exceptions described in subsection (b)-
`(A) the total number of such abortions;
`(B) the number of such abortions where the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape;
`(C) the number of such abortions where the pregnancy is the result of an act of incest against a minor; and
`(D) the number of such abortions where a physician provides a certification described in subsection (b)(2);
`(3) a statement of the date of the latest certification under subsection (a) for each entity receiving a grant under this title; and
`(4) a list of each entity to which an entity described in paragraph (1) makes available funds received through a grant under this title.
`(e) Definitions- In this section:
`(1) The term `entity' means the entire legal entity, including any entity that controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with such entity.
`(2) The term `hospital' has the meaning given to such term in section 1861(e) of the Social Security Act.'. Sphere: Related Content
Obama’s Pro-Abortion Views Fuel Pro-Life Defiance in March for Life
By Penny Starr
Senior Staff Writer
(CNSNews.com) - Just 48 hours after Barack Obama took the oath of office on the steps of the Capitol, hundreds of thousands of people poured onto the National Mall to ask the new president to break his campaign promise to adopt pro-abortion policies.
Held on the anniversary of the 1973 Supreme Court Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion, the 36th annual March for Life on Thursday drew pro-life activists from around the country for a rally on the mall and a massive march down Constitution Avenue to the Supreme Court on Capitol Hill.
But this year’s event differed from those in the past as speakers and banners sent a message to Obama and a signal that his election has energized the pro-life movement.
Former California Congressman Bob Dornan said he was repeating words from Obama’s inaugural speech to send that message.
“We send it back to you,” Dornan said. “We will not apologize for our way of life – or love of life -- nor will we waver in its defense, and for those of you who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror (and, media are you listening, abortion is terror) and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken. You cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.”
Dornan added: “We will defeat the culture of death or we will perish as a nation.” Joining the traditional “Choose Life” and “Stop Abortion” placards and banners, this year’s crowd held signs addressed to the new administration. “President Obama, don’t condemn our children to death,” one sign read. “No Freedom of Choice Act.”
“Obama said ‘Those who slaughter the innocent will be destroyed. Babies are innocent,’” read another sign.
Earlier in the day, the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) held its annual pre-March for Life press conference at the National Press Club, which also targeted Obama’s pro-abortion stance and his affiliation with pro-abortion groups.
Press packages included a brochure, “The Obama Abortion Agenda,” spelling out the policies his administration has promised to put in place, including the federal funding of abortions and the organizations that promote or perform abortion, and passage of the Freedom of Choice Act, which would strike down all state and federal laws limiting abortion, including parental notification laws and making partial-birth abortion legal again.
Olivia Gans, director of the NRLC’s American Victims of Abortion, said that the pro-life movement is already reacting to Obama’s election.
“I can tell you that already since the election of Mr. Obama I have heard of numerous new National Right to Life affiliate groups springing up, new chapters within our state organizations,” Gans said. “I have the invitations in my hand to prove that there are people interested in learning about what’s happening under this new hardcore, pro-abortion extremist administration that Mr. Obama represents.”
Wanda Franz, president of the NRLC, said she thinks the new president will be hearing from his constituents in the pro-life community.
“When people out there become aware of what’s going to happen as these changes occur, I think that we can help to bring those people back into the public eye and they’ll begin to realize that they have to put pressure on this new president,” Franz said. “They voted for him because they counted on him doing things they wanted him to do, and when he begins to be very pro-abortion in his policies, I think you’ll see people who voted for him coming forward and trying to change his mind.
Franz and other NRLC officials cited statistics that they said show that the pro-life movement has saved millions of lives by decreasing abortions, and that states across the country have enacted pro-life legislation, including laws that require a pregnant woman to view an ultrasound image of her unborn child before having an abortion.
But one thing remained constant at all of the pro-life activities taking place in Washington, D.C., this week. People of many faiths and backgrounds bowed their heads and prayed for an end to abortion.
Franz said that those prayers extend beyond the March for Life and are aimed directly at President Obama. Sphere: Related Content
Senior Staff Writer
(CNSNews.com) - Just 48 hours after Barack Obama took the oath of office on the steps of the Capitol, hundreds of thousands of people poured onto the National Mall to ask the new president to break his campaign promise to adopt pro-abortion policies.
Held on the anniversary of the 1973 Supreme Court Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion, the 36th annual March for Life on Thursday drew pro-life activists from around the country for a rally on the mall and a massive march down Constitution Avenue to the Supreme Court on Capitol Hill.
But this year’s event differed from those in the past as speakers and banners sent a message to Obama and a signal that his election has energized the pro-life movement.
Former California Congressman Bob Dornan said he was repeating words from Obama’s inaugural speech to send that message.
“We send it back to you,” Dornan said. “We will not apologize for our way of life – or love of life -- nor will we waver in its defense, and for those of you who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror (and, media are you listening, abortion is terror) and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken. You cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.”
Dornan added: “We will defeat the culture of death or we will perish as a nation.” Joining the traditional “Choose Life” and “Stop Abortion” placards and banners, this year’s crowd held signs addressed to the new administration. “President Obama, don’t condemn our children to death,” one sign read. “No Freedom of Choice Act.”
“Obama said ‘Those who slaughter the innocent will be destroyed. Babies are innocent,’” read another sign.
Earlier in the day, the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) held its annual pre-March for Life press conference at the National Press Club, which also targeted Obama’s pro-abortion stance and his affiliation with pro-abortion groups.
Press packages included a brochure, “The Obama Abortion Agenda,” spelling out the policies his administration has promised to put in place, including the federal funding of abortions and the organizations that promote or perform abortion, and passage of the Freedom of Choice Act, which would strike down all state and federal laws limiting abortion, including parental notification laws and making partial-birth abortion legal again.
Olivia Gans, director of the NRLC’s American Victims of Abortion, said that the pro-life movement is already reacting to Obama’s election.
“I can tell you that already since the election of Mr. Obama I have heard of numerous new National Right to Life affiliate groups springing up, new chapters within our state organizations,” Gans said. “I have the invitations in my hand to prove that there are people interested in learning about what’s happening under this new hardcore, pro-abortion extremist administration that Mr. Obama represents.”
Wanda Franz, president of the NRLC, said she thinks the new president will be hearing from his constituents in the pro-life community.
“When people out there become aware of what’s going to happen as these changes occur, I think that we can help to bring those people back into the public eye and they’ll begin to realize that they have to put pressure on this new president,” Franz said. “They voted for him because they counted on him doing things they wanted him to do, and when he begins to be very pro-abortion in his policies, I think you’ll see people who voted for him coming forward and trying to change his mind.
Franz and other NRLC officials cited statistics that they said show that the pro-life movement has saved millions of lives by decreasing abortions, and that states across the country have enacted pro-life legislation, including laws that require a pregnant woman to view an ultrasound image of her unborn child before having an abortion.
But one thing remained constant at all of the pro-life activities taking place in Washington, D.C., this week. People of many faiths and backgrounds bowed their heads and prayed for an end to abortion.
Franz said that those prayers extend beyond the March for Life and are aimed directly at President Obama. Sphere: Related Content
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
