Incongruous Events & Actions In Our World

Retirement Fund Tapped to Avoid National Debt Limit

The Treasury Department has started drawing from the civil service pension fund to avoid hitting the $8.2 trillion national debt limit. The move to tap the pension fund follows last month's decision to suspend investments in a retirement savings plan held by government employees.

In a letter to Congress this week, Treasury Secretary John W. Snow said he would rely on the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund to avoid bumping up against the statutory debt limit. He said the Treasury is suspending investments and will redeem a portion of the money credited to the fund.

Once Congress raises the debt limit, the Treasury will "restore all due interest and principal" to the pension fund as soon as possible, Snow said. He made a similar promise when the Treasury announced that reinvestment of some assets in the Thrift Savings Plan's government securities fund, or G Fund, had been suspended.

The civil service trust fund will provide the Treasury with several billion dollars for extra borrowing. The fund had an estimated balance of about $655 billion at the start of the year, but only a small portion of that is available to the Treasury because of the statutes restricting the fund's use during "debt issuance suspension" periods. The G Fund has assets of about $65.3 billion, and all are available for Treasury's use.

The Treasury has leaned on federal employee retirement funds in past years when officials worried about a possible default on the national debt, and most federal employees take it in stride. Still, many employees object to the financial maneuvers, arguing that they amount to a raid on their personal accounts.

Isn't this the same thing that corporations have been called on the carpet for in the past? Can we really be in such a financial state that we have to monkey around with the retirement security of thousands of families? Couldn't we merely cut the salaries of all elected officials in the federal government? My suggestion is that we cut the salary of every elected federal official and political appointee by 75% until the deficit is back under tight controls. At least then we will be putting those responsible for the mess in the position of being directly accountable for their actions instead of putting the retirement funding of an entire workforce at risk.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Democrats' Data Mining Stirs An Intraparty Battle: With Private Effort on Voter Information, Ickes and Soros Challenge Dean and DNC

A group of well-connected Democrats led by a former top aide to Bill Clinton is raising millions of dollars to start a private firm that plans to compile huge amounts of data on Americans to identify Democratic voters and blunt what has been a clear Republican lead in using technology for political advantage.

The effort by Harold Ickes, a deputy chief of staff in the Clinton White House and an adviser to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), is prompting intense behind-the-scenes debate in Democratic circles. Officials at the Democratic National Committee think that creating a modern database is their job, and they say that a competing for-profit entity could divert energy and money that should instead be invested with the national party.

Ickes and others involved in the effort acknowledge that their activities are in part a vote of no confidence that the DNC under Chairman Howard Dean is ready to compete with Republicans on the technological front. "The Republicans have developed a cadre of people who appreciate databases and know how to use them, and we are way behind the march," said Ickes, whose political technology venture is being backed by financier George Soros.

Let us examine this... Bill Clinton has been involved in helping the Dubai Ports World navigate the ins and outs of getting the contract through federal rigmarole, now Clinton aides are in the process of dividing the Democratic Party.

This is one of the reasons why the Democrats may lose the mid-term elections as well as the next presidential run. They can't seem to form a cohesive party, build a platform built upon first principles embodies in the Constitution, and avoid public squabbles in the process. It is one thing to have internal struggles, and another thing altogether to hang out "dirty laundry" for all the world to see. For most people it would appear that the Dems have an opportunity to flip the balance back toward a shared power base with the Republicans... but it seems they can't get out of their own way to do it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

House Agrees To Vote On Ports:
Showdown With President Likely

Efforts by the White House to hold off legislation challenging a Dubai-owned company's acquisition of operations at six major U.S. ports collapsed yesterday when House Republican leaders agreed to allow a vote next week that could kill the deal.

Yeah! Someone listened to the voices raised about this situation... However, hasn't the deal already gone through? Aren't we closing the door after the barn has already been set on fire?

Appropriations Committee Chairman Jerry Lewis (R-Calif.) will attach legislation to block the deal today to a must-pass emergency spending bill funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. A House vote on the measure next week will set up a direct confrontation with President Bush, who sternly vowed to veto any bill delaying or stopping Dubai Ports World's purchase of London-based Peninsular & Oriental Steamship Co.

That will tick Mr. Bush off... and he will once again use his political muscle to do some serious arm-twisting to get his way.

"Listen, this is a very big political problem," said House Majority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio), explaining that he had to give his rank-and-file members a chance to vote. "There are two things that go on in this town. We do public policy, and we do politics. And you know, most bills at the end of the day, the politics and the policy kind of come together, but not always. And we are into one of these situations where this has become a very hot political potato."

What the hell is Boehner saying? That politics is more important than policy? That sometimes politics is more important than policy? That there are only two important things involved in what congress does in Washington? Does anyone else see a significant problem in this form of leadership?

Ron Bonjean, spokesman for House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), said GOP leadership is "endorsing the viewpoint of our members and Chairman Lewis that we do not believe the U.S. should allow a government-owned company to operate American ports."

Wonderful! Where were they before the deal was already done? Why weren't the members of congress alert enough to catch wind of this deal before the rest of us brought it to their attention? Can we say "F-A-I-L-U-R-E" of the GOP and Dems to provide national security oversight? Can we say "F-A-I-L-U-R-E" of the GOP and Dems to provide checks and balances for the executive branch? Can we say that we have left our gates open and vulnerable while we were busy listening to a power-mad executive and congressional leadership? Face it, we're screwed if we wait for congress or the Bush administration to provide for national security or protect our civil liberties.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said last night that the administration is "committed to keeping open and sincere lines of communication with Congress." She added, though, that "the president's position is unchanged."

Of course the president's position hasn't changed. A man of his significant entrenchment cannot be seen as "wishy-washy" or a "flip-flopper." He can continue to be wrong, to be bull-headed, to ignore the dangers his position hold for us... but he can never be seen as changing his mind.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

BUSH, NATO, AND DARFUR

Last week, TNR's editors applauded President Bush for "starting to get serious about Darfur." And, briefly, it seems he did. In February, the United States used its month as chair of the Security Council to advocate for the United Nations to take over security responsibilities in Darfur from the badly undermanned African Union. Bush spoke of "NATO stewardship" of a peacekeeping mission and of doubling the number of troops on the ground. And he explained our moral obligation to bring genocide perpetrators to justice, saying, "There has to be a consequence for people abusing their fellow citizens." It wasn't just Bush who seemed to renew his interest in Darfur recently: Last week the Senate passed a resolution with bipartisan sponsorship urging the administration to "take steps immediately to help improve the security situation in Darfur," including the possible deployment of NATO troops.

But Monday brought sobering news from Europe, where NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer ruled out the possibility of sending NATO troops to Darfur. NATO's role, he said, should be "in the enabling sphere" and should not involve "the boots of troops on the ground." In truth, even before these remarks, it was clear that NATO was going to balk at sending forces to Darfur. After Bush's remarks, a NATO diplomat in Brussels said, "While there is a willingness on the part of NATO to do more in terms of airlift, to do anything more would be extremely difficult because a number of nations oppose any deeper involvement than that."

The Darfur situation has gone on for years. In that time the US has all but ignored it... and the genocide that has been an integral part of the problem. It bothers me that the only way we have gotten involved in the Darfur situation is to point out how far astray others have gone while trying to do something about it. Darfur represents how wrong-headed US foreign policy is under the current leadership.

Where is the Bush Doctrine in matters of human rights and humanitarian intervention?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Congress Votes to Renew Patriot Act, With Changes

There is no logical reason, given the testimony, spin and lies told by this administration to congress, to renew the USA Patriot Act in any form. What was called for in this situation was a very thoughtful process that led to a completely different law that allowed interagency cooperation without the rest of the provisions of the Patriot Act. Additionally, what was called for was a law that put tighter reins on how the administration could use its war powers in a state of emergency but not war. We are not at war. Yes, we had an emergency during the events of 9-11. But that emergency was over years ago. We are right to maintain a high level of awareness to prevent future terrorist action, but not so high as to abandon all of our first principles and reason. We need to preserve that which makes us who we are... but that is not part of the Bush ideology.

Congress voted yesterday to renew a four-year-old anti-terrorism law that makes it easier for federal agents to secretly obtain Americans' records and communications, even as some lawmakers warned that voters are growing increasingly concerned about protecting civil liberties during the fight against terrorism.

The vote to renew the USA Patriot Act marks a victory for President Bush at a time when he is defending a program of warrantless domestic eavesdropping conducted by the National Security Agency. Congress has scheduled several hearings on the NSA program, and the Senate intelligence committee created a subcommittee yesterday to scrutinize it.

The House voted 280 to 138 to approve a Senate-passed measure that would make several changes to the Patriot Act, which was enacted shortly after the 2001 terrorist attacks. Both chambers earlier approved another bill to extend the act's provisions that are scheduled to expire, and Bush is expected to sign the measures as a package.

The law makes it easier for federal agents to secretly tap phones, obtain library and bank records, and search homes of terrorism suspects. Bush has called it a vital tool in protecting the country. But numerous civil libertarians and librarians said it allows abuse of innocent Americans' privacy, and lawmakers agreed last year to add several safeguards before renewing provisions that are scheduled to expire.

One change involves National Security Letters, which are subpoenas for financial and electronic records that do not require a judge's approval. Libraries functioning in their "traditional capacity" would no longer be subject to such letters. Also modified are "Section 215 subpoenas," which are granted by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court. Recipients would have the explicit right to challenge the subpoenas' nondisclosure or "gag order" requirements.

The reauthorization would make permanent all but two of the Patriot Act's provisions. The Senate, in which four Republicans joined most Democrats in pushing for greater safeguards, insisted on four-year sunsets of the FBI's authority to conduct "roving wiretaps" of targets with multiple phones or e-mail devices, and of the government's powers to seize business records with the FISA court's approval.

Please take NOTE that this reauthorization makes all but two Patriot Act provisions PERMANENT. Fascism is here to stay as long as this act remains in force.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Senate Panel Blocks Eavesdropping Probe

More evidence that fascism is here to stay... UNLESS WE TAKE ACTION!

The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence voted along party lines yesterday to reject a Democratic proposal to investigate the Bush administration's domestic surveillance program and instead approved establishing, with White House approval, a seven-member panel to oversee the effort.

The conspiracy to usurp the rights of citizens and expand the powers of the government is in the hands of the Republican ultra-conservatives that had promised that our taxes would be reduced, our government would get smaller and the "values" of our people would be upheld. Well, the reality is that the taxes are only reduced for those who already hold economic and political advantages. Under the Bush administration our government--and the powers claimed by those in office--has expanded and usurped powers and authority not delineated to it by law.

Chairman Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) told reporters after the closed session that he had asked the committee "to reject confrontation in favor of accommodation" and that the new subcommittee, which he described as "an accommodation with the White House," would "conduct oversight of the terrorist surveillance program." The program, which became public in December, has allowed the National Security Agency to monitor phone calls and e-mails between U.S. residents and suspected terrorists abroad without first obtaining warrants from a secret court that handles such matters.

Roberts has joined the ranks of backpeddling slobs that seem to populate the halls of government.

The panel's vice chairman, Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), took a sharply different view of yesterday's outcome. "The committee is, to put it bluntly, basically under the control of the White House through its chairman," he told reporters. "At the direction of the White House, the Republican majority has voted down my motion to have a careful and fact-based review of the National Security Agency's surveillance eavesdropping activities inside the United States."

Rockefeller said he had spent 6 1/2 hours at the NSA last week getting answers to more than 450 questions he had submitted to the agency, adding that he had "fought hard for this information to be shared with the full committee." But suddenly, he said, "seven of them are okay and eight of them, sorry, you don't make it." Rockefeller is one of eight members of Congress who have been briefed on the program.

Is this a stand on genuine principle or merely taking advantage of the political situation. We cannot be sure. But we should endorse the effort and ideas on the grounds that doing so will protect our rights. But why is it we can't seem to get any straight answers from anyone holding office?

Also yesterday, legislation sponsored by Sen. Mike DeWine (R-Ohio), a member of the intelligence committee, drew support from two other key GOP panel members, Sens. Olympia J. Snowe (Maine) and Chuck Hagel (Neb.). It would permit warrantless surveillance of calls between the United States and another country involving "a designated terrorist organization" for 45 days, after which the government can stop the eavesdropping, seek a warrant, or explain to Congress why it wants to continue without a warrant.

Are there any Republicans that bother to read the Constitution? DeWine is a fascist and should be shot out of a cannon on the day he loses the next election he faces. He has never met a right that couldn't be over-ridden by congressional power (not authority, but POWER). Snowe is as wishy-washy as they come and should be shot out of a cannon if she decides to run again. She does not represent the views of most of the people living, working and struggling in Maine. But because only about 25% of those eligible to vote bother to stand up and be counted, she gets elected. At least Hagel has an excuse...

The bill would also create a subcommittee that would carry out monitoring of all aspects of the program, "on a case-by-case" basis, DeWine told reporters. Roberts told reporters that DeWine had consulted with him and the White House and "in concept it is a very good proposal." At the White House, press secretary Scott McClellan described the DeWine proposal as interesting but reiterated the position that Bush already has the power to institute the program.

We would call this subcommittee the "Republican Rubber Stamp Committee."

The NSA issue was brought up at a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing by Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, who is drafting his own bill. Specter warned that he will try to reduce the administration's funding unless Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales agrees to answer more of his committee's questions.
"We're having quite a time in getting responses to questions as to what has happened with the electronic surveillance program," Specter said. "I want to put the administration on notice and this committee on notice that I may be looking for an amendment to limit funding as to the electronic surveillance program -- which is the power of the purse -- if we can't get an answer in any other way."

Bravo! But Specter needs to decide which side of the fence he wants to be on... His actions thus far are on one side today and the other side tomorrow. A principled man lives and acts in a consistent manner.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

DeLay Wins Tex. GOP Primary: Former House Majority Leader Easily Beats Three Challengers

Rep. Tom DeLay, facing an unusual four-way Republican primary, won the party's nomination Tuesday, calling his victory a rejection by voters of "the politics of personal destruction."

"I have always placed my faith in the voters, and today's vote shows they have placed their full faith in me," DeLay, 58, said in a statement issued by his reelection campaign.

"Democrat attacks and the politics of personal destruction were heavily used by my opponents in this Republican primary, and they were rejected just like they will be in November," he said.

The 11-term congressman, who voted in his suburban Houston district Tuesday morning and greeted voters at several polls, spent the rest of the day in Washington, voting to renew the USA Patriot Act in the late afternoon and attending an evening fundraiser held by two Capitol Hill lobbyists. The event raised money for DeLay's reelection campaign -- a race that will pit him against Nick Lampson, a former congressman. Lampson had no opponent in Tuesday's Democratic primary.

Are the people in Texas just dense or really stupid? Can they really believe that voting someone that has demonstrated a complete lack of morality really represents the best Texas has to offer? DeLay has clearly violated the ethics of the office if not the law. This is as bad as re-electing Ted Kennedy after Chappaquiddick. We can only hope the Dems have their stuff together enough to take advantage of the character flaws that are inherent in DeLay and the Texas Republican Party.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Warning Sounded About Levees

More Incompetence Is At Hand!

An expert panel monitoring reconstruction of New Orleans's hurricane-protection system warned federal engineers last month about the presence of weak, sandy soils in a newly rebuilt levee, the panel's leader said yesterday, escalating a dispute over the soundness of the government's rebuilding effort.

Raymond Seed, an engineering professor at the University of California at Berkeley, also disclosed new details about what he described as serious flaws in the Army Corps of Engineers building practices. Seed said the problems were observed in at least three locations along an 11-mile earthen levee near Lake Borgne, east of New Orleans, that was nearly washed away by Hurricane Katrina on Aug. 29.

Can anything be accomplished under the leadership of President Bush and the Republican ultra-conservatives? Come on America! Wake up!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Libby Defense Request Strongly Resisted by CIA

The CIA said in an affidavit released yesterday that meeting the demand of former White House official I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby for copies of highly classified intelligence documents he saw before he was indicted would "impose an enormous burden" and divert its analysts from more important tasks.

Attorneys for Libby, former chief of staff to Vice President Cheney, responded that the CIA was exaggerating the difficulty of finding and turning over the documents. But they also scaled back their request for information in the hope of persuading a federal judge to order the agency to produce the documents.

At issue are documents that include the President's Daily Brief, the CIA's most sensitive intelligence report. Written in slightly different form for the president, the vice president and a handful of other senior officials, PDBs contain raw data clearly attributed to what the CIA considers its most reliable sources.

The demand by Libby, who has been indicted on charges of perjury, making false statements and obstruction of justice in the Valerie Plame leak case, is unprecedented and clearly unsettling to the CIA and to Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald, whose grand jury brought the charges.

In court papers, Fitzgerald has accused Libby's defense team of engaging in graymail -- demanding unobtainable legal documents to terminate a court proceeding. Libby's legal team responded that this accusation was "not only false but insulting."

It is not disloyalty or "graymail" to seek the resources to put on a fair defense. Libby might be seeing that the Republican method of protect civil liberties is a bit out of balance. If the government wants to protect the documents, steps can be taken to allow a court to view them under secure methods and make an evidentiary ruling. But a failure of the government to produce evidence that could potentially prove Libby innocent, or even less culpable, is a failure to provide Libby with his basic rights to a fair trial... Which doesn't seem to metter to the Bush administration, the Republican dominated congress or the ultra-conservative stacked bench.

God better bless America... because the Phillistines have invaded our government.