The John Sydney McCain Memorial Crappie Award

This one was easy...

Earlier today, I wrote a post concerning the finger-pointing going on in D.C. over the spectacle of AIG giving millions of dollars in bonuses to executives who were so good at their jobs that AIG needs billions of dollars in taxpayer-funded bailouts to remain open for business.

In that post, I linked to a HuffPo post that quoted Jon Kyl on the bonuses. When appearing on Fred Thompson's radio show, Kyl opined -

"If the contracts are stupid contracts, if they committed them to do things that weren't right, or went way overboard, because taxpayers have put a bunch of money behind AIG, certainly we have the right to be asking those kinds of questions."

In other words, he was saying the even if the contracts were bad, they have to be honored.

Now journey back four months or so to his sentiments regarding the auto industry, from one of his weekly columns (advocating bankruptcy) -

Unfortunately, these companies can’t do that [adequately cut costs] voluntarily because they have labor union agreements and other contractual obligations. The unions are not going to make the concessions sufficient to enable these companies to compete. The only way to address their problems is under an existing code in our bankruptcy laws known as Chapter 11.

So for his shamelessly hypocritical reverse inward pike with a twist (wealthy corporate con artists should get a free pass; union workers should get screwed), Senator Jon Llewellyn Kyl will be providing gainful employment to the latest John Sydney McCain Memorial Crappie Award.

Leo Gerard, International President of the United Steelworkers summed it up best with the title of his blog post regarding Kyl's (and most Reps') sentiments regarding bail outs:

"Congress bails out those who shower before work, but not those who shower after work"

Turns out that not much has changed in Rep attitudes toward working class Americans in spite of the change in Presidential administrations (and the landslide losses in the Presidential and Congressional elections that precipitated the change in Presidents).

AIG: It may be Obama's mess to clean up, but it isn't his fault

Many people, including me, are royally ticked off over the over $165 million in bonuses that AIG has given out to executives at the unit of their business that most contributed to AIG's fall.

While AIG cratered under the Republicans' watch (or to be more accurate, their "not-watch") and AIG's bailouts began last year, every Republican has pointed fingers not at themselves, or at the Bush Administration's utter contempt for common-sense regulatory oversight, but instead at President Obama, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, and Democrats in general.

From the beginning of the Bush Administration until the end of his time in office eight years later, the Bushies, with the enthusiastic complicity of their Republican accomplices caucus in Congress, a concerted effort was made to undermine regulations and laws restricting business.

It was open season on the average working American's freedom and economic security while corporate executives and the already-wealthy to feather their own nests in ways that that socialized risk (witness the bailouts) and privatized profit (witness the bonuses paid out of taxpayer bailout money).

Now that the financial industry's house of cards has been blown down by the winds of economic reality, the Reps are attempting to affix the blame for it everywhere except where it belongs - to the executives themselves, the ones who allowed their inveterate greed to rule the day, and to their cheerleaders, the 43rd President of the United States, his Administration, and their lackeys in Congress.

Today's hearing of the House Financial Services Committee concerning the issue, featuring current AIG CEO Edward Liddy, highlighted the likes of Republican Reps. Hensarling, Royce, and more blaming the current Administration, especially Geithner, for the bonuses, while blithely ignoring the long history of not-so-benign neglect and actual malice on their own part that led up to the collapses of the financial industry and the American economy.

Let me make my point, and make it clearly -

Blaming Barack Obama and his Administration for a mess that they inherited is not only predictably partisan (something which I can frequently, and justifiably, be called :) ), but it's the sort of foolhardy revisionist thinking that will lead to history repeating itself.

It's time to cut through the BS, deal with the misuse of public funds (which the bonuses most certainly are), and ensure that it doesn't happen again. I don't even think that it is necessary to excoriate the Bushies (unless something criminal and actionable can be proven, then we should nuke 'em...figuratively speaking :) ). Affixing blame is less important than determining exact what went wrong, both with AIG and the bail out, and figuring out ways to prevent it from happening again.

Note:

Some Republicans, like AZ's own Sen. Jon Kyl, have even gone so far as to rationalize paying the bonuses while calling the elected officials who have criticized the bonuses as "demagogues." (Huffington Post)

When I see behavior from elected officials that seems unexpected (right now, criticizing AIG is about as politically safe a move as there is in America), I tend to think to myself "Follow the money." That inspired a little research on my part into AIG's political contributions.

Turns out that AIG is bipartisan in its largesse. According to OpenSecrets.org, they've given $9.3 million since 1989, evenly splitting that between the two major parties. They're not dumb about it, as during the last election cycle they gave roughly 2/3 of their contributions to Democratic candidates. Of course, that just means that when the Reps were in power, they were the recipients of more money (logic: if receiving 2/3 of the contributions during the last presidential cycle brought the Dems even with the Reps, that means that the Reps had a significant lead before 2008).

Looking into Kyl's support for AIG, I found that he has received at least $15K from AIG's PAC and employees since 1998, which sounded significant.

Then I found that John McCain has received over $150K for his various campaigns.

Imagine how loyal Kyl would be if they just paid him like they've paid McCain and a few others?

Note2: My search through FEC records was a cursory one. I didn't try tracking payments to non-AIG PACs that in turn gave money to Kyl or McCain, nor did I do ZIP code or address searches to figure out how much was given by AIG spouses or family members who don't show up as AIG employees.

Later...

Both of AZ's U.S. Senators are in the top 10. That's a good thing, right???

Well...it depends what category's "top 10" we are talking about...

From ConsumerWatchdog.org -

WASHINGTON D.C. -- Health insurers and pharmaceutical manufacturers contributed $5.5 million to the top 10 recipients in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives during the last two election cycles - a period in which health care reform dominated political discourse, according to the nonprofit, nonpartisan Consumer Watchdog.

Health insurers contributed $2.2 million to the top 10 members of the U.S. Senate and House. Drug manufacturers contributed $3.3 million to the top 10 recipients in each legislative body. In all, health insurers and drug manufacturers contributed $24,220,976 to the current members of Congress in the last two election cycles.

The top 1o Senate recipients of Health Insurer Money (note: due to formatting issues, a direct copy and paste wasn't possible here) (emphasis mine) -

John McCain (R-AZ) - $251,834
Mitch McConnell (R-KY) - $200,200
Max Baucus (D-MT) - $183,750
Joe Lieberman (I-CT) - $101,400
Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) - $98,600
Susan Collins (R-ME) - $96,500
Jon Kyl (R-AZ) - $90,450
Mark Warner (D-VA) - $89,700
Orrin Hatch (R-UT) - $85,903
Ben Nelson (D-NE) - $83,300

Top 10 Senate recipients of Drug Co. Money -

John McCain - $294,603
Max Baucus - $229,020
Mitch McConnell - $225,200
Joe Lieberman - $196,540
Arlen Specter (R-PA) - $179,650
Robert Mendez (D-NJ) - $147,243
Mike Enzi (R-WY) - $134,500
Jon Kyl - $118,350
John Cornyn (R-TX) - $115,900

So should we be proud that AZ is the only state where both members of our delegation to the U.S. Senate are in the "top 10"??

BTW, and this is certain to tick off commenter Thane and a few other folks - data like this, data that shows the bipartisan impact of industry legalized bribes "campaign contributions" have on public policy only serves to strengthen the argument in favor of taking Arizona's system of publicly financed elections to the next level.

Later...

Arizona's Congressional delegation and the stimulus bill...

On Friday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a compromise version of H.R. 1, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The final vote was 246-183, with one answering 'present.' All House Republicans voted against the bill, and all but seven Democrats voted for the bill. All of AZ's Democratic representatives voted for it.

Later on Friday over in the Senate, the same compromise version was passed by a 60 - 38 vote. All Democrats present voted for the bill (Ted Kennedy was out, and Al Franken hasn't been seated yet), as well as Republicans Olympia Snow, Susan Collins (both from Maine) and Arlen Specter (PA). Both of AZ's Republican senators, Jon Kyl and John McCain, voted against the economic stimulus package.

AZ's delegation on the stimulus bill, in their own words (from news coverage, press releases, and the Congressional Record) -

Rep. Harry Mitchell (D-CD5), from a press release, courtesy Arizona Congress Watch - “Arizona’s job losses last year were worse than every other state but one. People are facing foreclosure and struggling to make ends meet,” said Mitchell. “The risk of inaction is too great. This bill will create and maintain jobs and we must take this step to get people back to work and get the economy back on track.”

Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-CD7), from a press release - “I voted to support today’s Recovery Act, a bill that is far from perfect, but opens up possibilities for many...The State of Arizona is in a budget crisis that it is translating to cuts in the Department of Economic Security, slashed departments at our public universities and colleges, money taken from our children in elementary, junior high, and high schools, and increases in hunger, poverty, and the ranks of the uninsured. The Recovery Act will help stop this kind of hemorrhaging, which is why I support it."

Rep. John Shadegg (R-CD3), from a press release -

"But one of the bill’s worst provisions has gone almost unnoticed, dangerously lurking below the radar of those exposing the bill’s flaws.

“Comparative Effectiveness Research,” sounds innocuous, but big-government programs always do. The $1.1 billion of the stimulus package earmarked for this project is a significant step toward government-run healthcare

Shadegg from a post in The Hill's CongressBlog, titled "Friday The 13th Horror" - "But of course the greatest horror is not the process – it is the product. At the end of the day we have an economic stimulus without economic stimulus."

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-CD8), as quoted in the Arizona Daily Star - 'The legislation will create or save 3.5 million jobs nationally over the next two years. Approximately 70,000 of those jobs will be in Arizona," she said in a press statement.'

The same article goes on to list a series of informational forums that Giffords will be part of, including one on Tuesday at ASU from noon - 1:30 p.m with CD5's Representative Harry Mitchell. (Pima Room in the Memorial Union)

More info on the forums, courtesy Congresswoman Giffords' website here.

Rep. Jeff Flake (R-CD6), from the Congressional Record - "We know enough about this legislation to know that it is bad legislation. First and foremost, the process is bad, but it’s bad legislation...I doubt that John Maynard Keynes would believe that $50 million for the
National Endowment for the Arts would be stimulative. All that it stimulates is more spending later."

Sen. Jon Kyl (R), from the Congressional Record - ...His speech is too long to find one good quote, so I recommend reading it in its entirety at the link. He opposed the bill for a litany of reasons, including ACORN, Filipino veterans, a maglev rail line from L.A. to Las Vegas, money for small shipyards (and not enough $ for big shipyards), and the Davis-Bacon Act (prevailing wage).

Sen. John McCain (R), was quoted as calling the bill "generational theft" on CNN and elsewhere. (NY Times)

President Obama is expected to sign the bill on Tuesday in Denver, and will be in Phoenix on Wednesday to announce a plan to fight home foreclosures. Details as they become available.

Note: In the future, I expect to leave this sort of post to Stacy at AZ Congress Watch - it took longer just to set up the links than to write the rest of the post.

Short Attention Span Musing - Legislative Edition

...Geez, I guess this means that State Sen. Russell Pearce (R-National Alliance) doesn't think that the readers of this blog are worthy of his 'copy and paste' skills.

And on behalf of my readers, I thank Sen. Pearce for that attitude. :)

Zelph at AZNetRoots found this post from BallotAccess.org about AZ's SB1158, a bill to compel presidential candidates will have to prove both their citizenship and their residency in the U.S. of 14 years before their names can be placed on the ballot. It's clearly directed at President Barack Obama (who was elected in spite of the debunked claims that his birth certificate is a forgery) though it could also serve to attack fellow Republican John McCain, who also twigged the Reps' lunatic fringe radar because he was born on a military base in Panama...and he isn't a fellow loon.

Now I wouldn't normally try to "steal the thunder" from Zelph's post (he's earned some for spotting this) but one of the comments on BallotAccess.org's post deserves comment itself -

It's a 3000+ word copy and paste special from Russell Pearce himself.

I call it a "copy and paste special" because of that 3000+ word comment, over 2600 of the words were copied and pasted articles from the Center for Immigration Studies, an anti-immigrant group masquerading as a neutral, "non-partisan" think tanks. (SourceWatch profile here)

You know, in spite of all the times that I have written so glowingly, Sen. Pearce has never taken the time to grace this blog with his brand of lazy but verbose nativist b.s.


...In more Pearce news, he has filed SB1170, a.k.a. the "He Ain't Heavy, He's My Brother" Act.

That bill sets out some specific rules for parties in a justice court action who wish to seek a change of venue because they feel they cannot receive a fair trial in a particular court. Under current law (ARS 22-303), the defendant just has to file an affadavit to the effect that he cannot receive a fair trial in order to move the trial. Under Pearce's bill, a defendant would also need the affadavits of "two other credible persons of the county that they have good reason to believe, and do believe, that the party cannot have a fair and impartial trial before the justice..."

This could also be called the "Lester Pearce is sick of getting noticed for cause" bill.

"Noticed for cause" is court-speak for the change of venue motion, and Russell Pearce's brother Lester is known as one of the most "noticed" JPs in the system.

He tends to be rather umm... "set in his views" (hey, what else would you expect from a Pearce? :)) ), so much so that there is a possibly apocryphal story going around about him. And apocryphal or not, the story goes a long way to illustrate Lester Pearce's tendencies.

Apparently a while back, another judge (called a 'pro tem') was substituting for Lester Pearce on his bench in the North Mesa precinct. After a trial where the defendant was acquitted by the pro tem, the clerk who was working in the court turned to the pro tem turned to the substitute and advised him that they didn't know how to record that because they had never needed the code for acquittal before.

As I said, the story could be apocryphal (I mean not even a Pearce could convict every defendant without exception, right?? Right???????), but it totally jibes with what I've heard about his court.

Stay tuned...

...Jon Kyl is operating like he is not up for reelection next year, which, of course, he isn't.

From ABS-CBN News (Philippines) -

World War II veteran Celestino Almeda will turn 92 in June. He relies on a small scooter to move around. He has been living in a daughter’s house, but now that she’s about to marry, he and a grandson are hunting for a new home.

He insists on paying his way and is counting on the $15,000 lump sum payment to Filipino World War II veterans – that is, if US Congress votes to give it to him and about 16,000 of his aging comrades.

{snip}

In another Fox Channel program, Republican Sen. Jon Kyl, a critic of the stimulus bill, claimed "there are so many things you can make fun of in this bill."

"Let me just mention one, millions of dollars to World War II Filipino veterans in the Philippines. Now, that may be a good thing to spend money on, but not in a stimulus bill. It doesn’t stimulate anything," he said.

But Almeda pointed out the lump sum payment will not add a single cent to the $800 billion stimulus bill.

"They thought this money to be given to Filipino veterans is an allotment from the stimulus bill package. It is not. The intention of Senator Inouye is just to use the stimulus bill as a vehicle so the $198 million approved in the 110th Congress and known as the Filipino Veterans Compensation Fund would be released to us," he added.

Yup, Jon - go ahead and pick on poor, elderly veterans.

Because while *you* may not be on the ballot next year, plenty of other Rep senators will be.


Later!

John Sydney McCain Memorial Crappie Award

Didn't have to look far this week to find the "winner" of this dubious award. In fact, the award, named after Arizona's senior Senator, is going to...


Arizona's junior Senator, Jon Kyl.


On Thursday, Senator Jon Kyl issued a press release touting the Senate's passage of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act.

From the presser -

The U.S. Senate today approved S. 22, The Omnibus Public Land Management Act -- a catch-all package that consists of more than 150 separate public land, water, and resource bills, including two that were authored by U.S. Senator Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), and several that he cosponsored.

He wrote or cosponsored many parts of the bill, so it wouldn't be shocking that he supported the bill, right?

So naturally, he voted *against* the bill. (Senate roll call vote 3)

Nice flip flop there, Senator.

To be fair to Senator Kyl, in his press release he actually did admit to voting against the bill, citing the cost of the non-Kyl additions to the bill, and the fact that no amendments to "improve" the bill (aka - remove the non-Kyl provisions) were allowed.

Apparently, the only worthy projects related to public lands are the ones that he supports.


On the other hand, at least he is finally doing some work for Arizona.


Even if he is voting against it when it comes before the full Senate.



Later!

Time for some 2010 speculations...

...especially since "Candie Dates" at Sonoran Alliance got the ball rolling with a post concerning possible candidates to replace Jan Brewer at the Secretary of State's office if she ascends to the governor's office (OK, OK - "when" :( ) and the AZ Rep has an article about how Janet Napolitano's expected move to D.C. would "shake up" the 2010 race for governor.

A couple of caveats -

1. Most of my focus will be on Democrats from Maricopa County because they're who I have the most familiarity with. There are certain to be candidates from Pima, Pinal, Coconino and other counties whose names I haven't heard.

2. This is all pure speculation on my part. None of the potential candidates mentioned has ever spoken to me about their future plans.

3. The underlying assumptions are that Janet Napolitano leaves and does not return to run against John McCain in two years (though a run against Jon Kyl in four years remains a possibility) and that, despite laying the groundwork for a reelection run, McCain chooses not to run again at age 74.

4. The goal of this post is to start a discussion, so if you have some legitimate speculations of your own, feel free to leave a comment (just keep it civil :) ).


On to the idle thoughts random musings... :))

State Mine Inspector - why on God's green earth is this still an elected office? Could someone explain this to me, please?


State Superintendent of Public Instruction -

Speculation elsewhere on possible Republican candidates has focused on State Sen. John Huppenthal and State Rep. Rich Crandall. Both are very conservative; Huppenthal despises public education with a burning passion and Crandall does not.

As for possible Democratic candidates, Slade Mead and Jason Williams, who both ran in 2006 may try again. However, Williams has remained more active in the education field and has a higher profile in that area. Other to consider include Jackie and John Thrasher. Both are career teachers, both lost elections this year and may want to try for different offices in 2010 - it's looking more and more like John is not destined to be the one who unseats Congressman Trent Franks in CD3 and Jackie could make Republicans Jim Weiers and Doug Quelland eat green crow by winning a statewide office after weaselling their way back into office in LD10.


State Treasurer - No clue here. At all.


Attorney General -

On the Republican side, I have no idea, though I expect their nominee to be some party apparatchik.

As for the Democratic possibilities, I don't have much more of a clue here, though Tim Nelson (former candidate for Maricopa County Attorney) is a possibility if he doesn't accompany Napolitano to D.C. Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon is a possibility here too, if he chooses to give Terry Goddard an unobstructed run at the Democratic gubernortorial nomination. Long shots to even consider a run, much less win one, are Don Bivens, chair of the AZ Democratic Party, and Mark Manoil, chair of the Maricopa County Democratic Party. Both are practicing lawyers.


Secretary of State -

The Sonoran Alliance post linked above has a pretty good run down of possible Rep candidates for 2010 even though the focus was on possibilities for appointment to replace Brewer in the immediate future. One name that was mentioned over there was former Tempe state Rep. Laura Knaperek. They raved over her because she is so conservative, but I don't see it - she lost her last general election in 2006 against a couple of relatively new Democratic candidates for state lege, and she lost her last primary this year in CD5. Even good candidates can lose *one* election but she has lost three this decade. She may want to consider *not* running for office for a while.

Current Corporation Commissioner Kris Mayes may consider a run here, too. While her non-political experience is in journalism, she has degrees in law and public administration. Since she is rumored to be interested in moving to the ninth floor (aka - the Governor's office), this office would be a logical steppingstone.

As for Democrats, Sandra Kennedy has been rumored to have interest in the job, though her recent victory in the AZ Corporation Commission race probably means she won't go for this in two years. There are a couple of termed out state legislators who may be interested, and perhaps some not-so-termed-out ones, if it doesn't look like the Dems will improve their representation in the lege in two years.


Governor -

The list is long and varied here. The Republican possibilities are discussed in the AZ Rep article, though Jan Brewer has to be considered the early favorite whether or not she ascends into the governorship within a few weeks. A dark horse here could be Congressman Jeff Flake, whose interest in the job has been the subject of rumors in the past. While the governor's job pays less than U.S. Rep, he wouldn't have to fly back and forth to D.C. every weekend and wouldn't have to sleep in his office to save money for his kids' college education.

On the Democratic side, current Attorney General Terry Goddard is considered the presumptive front-runner for the Democratic nomination with Phil Gordon the primary threat to that. Former AZ Dem chair and former candidate for U.S. Senate Jim Pederson is also mentioned frequently. Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords has been the subject of rumors here, but she seems more likely to take a run at John McCain's Senate seat at this point.


Arizona Corporation Commission (2 seats) -

No clue as for the Republican possiblilities, and the only Democratic names that I can think of right off the top of my head are Sam George and Kara Kelty, both of whom were candidates this year.


U.S. Senate -

If McCain doesn't run again, the field is wide open on both sides of the aisle.

Republican possibilities include current Congressmen John Shadegg (CD3) and Jeff Flake (CD6), though there are sure to be other names floated (Mayes' name might fit here, too, but she passed on a run in CD1 this year. She may not be interested in federal office.)

Democratic possibilities include whichever of the Goddard/Gordon duo doesn't run for governor, Jim Pederson (again) and Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (CD8). Giffords may be a possible candidate even if McCain runs again - many people in AZ believe that a strong female candidate would have the best chance of unseating the popular McCain.


U.S. Congress -

There is a frequent rumor that Congressman Ed Pastor (CD4) could face a primary challenge in two years from Maricopa County Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox. If that actually happens, it would be an interesting, and probably heated, contest between two entrenched west Phoenix political machines.

As for the other CDs, I've got no idea, though any special-election winning replacement for rumored-to-becoming-U.S. Secretary of the Interior Raul Grijalva (CD7) is certain to face some strong challengers.


Other names that could fit into one of these potential races include Dennis Burke (former Napolitano chief of staff and rumored U.S. Attorney-to-be), state legislators David Lujan (D), Kyrsten Sinema (D), Chad Campbell (D) and Michelle Reagan (R) and outgoing Scottsdale Mayor Mary Manross.



Later!

Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans rate members of Congress...AZ results

Heads up on this courtesy Ron Pies' AZCentral.com blog...

The grades of AZ's Congressional delegation, from the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America Action Fund -

Harry Mitchell (D-CD5) - A+ - comment: "13 out of 13 votes with IAVA Action, plus 2 points for Post-9/11 GI Bill cosponsorship"

Note: Mitchell has just been endorsed by the VFW Political Action Committee.

Gabrelle Giffords (D-CD8) - A+ - comment: "13 out of 13 votes with IAVA Action, plus 2 points for Post-9/11 GI Bill cosponsorship"

Ed Pastor (D-CD4) - A - comment: "11 out of 13 votes with IAVA Action, plus 2 points for Post-9/11 GI Bill cosponsorship"

Raul Grijalva (D-CD7) - A - comment: "12 out of 13 votes with IAVA Action, plus 2 points for Post-9/11 GI Bill cosponsorship"

Rick Renzi (R-CD1) - A - comment: "11 out of 13 votes with IAVA Action, plus 2 points for Post-9/11 GI Bill cosponsorship"

Trent Franks (R-CD2) - C - comment: "8 out of 13 votes with IAVA Action, not a Post-9/11 GI Bill cosponsor"

John Shadegg (R-CD3) - B - comment: "10 out of 13 votes with IAVA Action, not a Post-9/11 GI Bill cosponsor"

Jeff Flake (R-CD6) - C - comment: "7 out of 13 votes with IAVA Action, not a Post-9/11 GI Bill cosponsor"

John McCain, U.S. Senator and Republican presidential nominee - D - comment: "3 out of 9 votes with IAVA Action, not a Post-9/11 GI Bill cosponsor"

Jon Kyl, U.S. Senator - C - comment: "5 out of 9 votes with IAVA Action, not a Post-9/11 GI Bill cosponsor"


The average grade for the Democratic members of AZ's delegation? 4.25 (A = 4 points, B = 3, etc., with "+" = an additional .5)

The average grade for the Republican members of AZ's delegation? 2.33; without the soon-to-be gone Renzi inflating their grade? 2, barely a C.

OK, so it's not much of a surprise that AZ's Republicans did so poorly on veterans' issues when compared to AZ's Democrats - it's long been common knowledge that Republican 'support our veterans' rhetoric is just that, *rhetoric.*

Not substance.

However, who would have guessed that the biggest drag on the Reps' grade would be John McCain, the former naval aviator who touts his status as a former POW at every turn?

It seems that Rudy Giuliani's "noun, verb, 9-11" meaningless spiel has been replaced by John McCain's "noun, verb, "POW" standard stump speech as the biggest snow job in American politics.

The only veterans McCain is concerned about are himself and those that support him with money or Swift Boat-style ad appearances; the rest mean nothing to him.

Access the entire report card here.

Later!

Could Renzi take down both McCain and Kyl with him?

From The Hill -

Federal agents interviewed staffers for likely Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) as part of their corruption case against Rep. Rick Renzi (R-Ariz.).
U.S. Attorney for the District of Arizona Diane J. Humetewa and fellow prosecutors disclosed the interviews with aides for McCain and fellow Arizona Republican Sen. Jon Kyl in a written response to Renzi’s attorneys, who asked for the contents of the interview to help prepare for Renzi’s upcoming trial, which is scheduled for October.

OK, so given that Renzi's trial isn't starting until October, any "taking down" probably won't happen until after the fall elections, if at all. However, it *is* fun to watch how the Renzi scandal just keeps expanding to include some of the most senior members of the GOP members of the AZ delegation to D.C.

With this report, the public count is at four out of the six GOPers - Renzi himself (of course), Kyl, McCain (of course, McCain has land deal and lobbyist issues of his own to deal with), and John Shadegg (those darn wiretaps!)

Wonder if he is going to go for a clean sweep and drag down Trent Franks and Jeff Flake too?

We can only hope...

Stay tuned on this one...

Senate Republicans take a stand...in favor of discrimination

From the New York Times -

Senate Republicans on Wednesday blocked a measure intended to overturn a Supreme Court decision limiting pay discrimination suits in a politically charged vote certain to be replayed in the presidential and Congressional campaigns.

The Republicans were worried that the measure's language to ease lawsuit-restricting time limits might result in some companies actually being held responsible for their discriminatory practices.

Can't have that, can we??

The bill is H.R. 2831, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2007; today's Senate vote was a procedural vote to invoke cloture, or to limit debate, on the bill. 56 Senators voted in favor, but 60 votes are needed to pass a cloture motion.

As would be expected by anyone familiar with their voting records, Arizona's own Jon Kyl (R-Big Pharma) voted against cloture, and John McCain (R-Cindy. What State Are We In Today?) missed the vote, though he did say that he would have opposed H.R. 2831 if he could be bothered to show up to work.

I supposed I could criticize them for failing to represent the interests of Arizona's working women, but since it's been years since they actually represented the interests of Arizona, none of today's proceedings were unexpected.

It should be noted that McCain's Democratic counterparts in the race for the White House, Senators Clinton and Obama, somehow found ways to take time out of their very active campaign schedules to show up and vote while the unopposed McCain declined to do so.


The New Republic's take on today's vote here.

An ACLU press release on the vote here.

Later!

Short Attention Span Musing

...Guess the Republican Party's worshipful love of 'private property rights' is exceeded only by their hatred for brown people.

From the Arizona Daily Star (emphasis added) -

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff likes to argue that illegal traffic across the border "has caused severe and profound impacts to the environment."

Trash and litter don't begin to compare to the severe and profound impacts to the environment that could follow Chertoff's high-handed decision on Tuesday to waive 36 laws, ignore local expertise and concerns, shut down vital wildlife corridors and slam up border fencing.

{snip}

Republican Sen. Jon Kyl...told Fox News Tuesday that Chertoff was just doing his job.

"We gave him the authority for the waivers," Kyl said. "We've given him the money. And we've said, get about the job (of finishing the fence)."

Last year, Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ7) introduced H.R. 2593, the Borderlands Conservation Security Act. The bill has been languishing in various committees since its introduction; maybe Chertoff's open contempt for the laws and people of the United States will inspire a couple of committee chairs to get off their asses.

Rep. Grijalva's press release on Chertoff's waivers of law here.

The Department of Homeland Security's press release here.


...Congratulations go out to Rep. Harry Mitchell (D-AZ5) on the House unanimously passing his H.R. 4847, the United States Fire Administration Reauthorization Act of 2008.

The bill authorizes nearly $300 million in appropriations over a four year period for many things, including training for improved fighting of fires such as those from terrorism, natural disasters, and wildfires (Arizona has been known to have one or two of those, hasn't it?? ).

Mitchell's press release on the matter here.

CQPolitics' story on the vote here.


...Guess that now that people aren't blindly buying into the 'fear' component of their "fear and smear" campaign to retain control of the White House (and to perhap regain control of Congress), the Republicans have decided to minimize the impact of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

From AP via Yahoo! News -

A conservative Republican congressman says he supports helping victims of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks but did not offer an apology for remarks he made while questioning the need for federal compensation.

During a joint hearing on Tuesday by two House Judiciary subcommittees considering legislation to extend benefits, [Rep. Darrell] Issa [R-CA] described the Sept. 11 attacks as "a fire that had no dirty bomb in it" and added: "It had no chemical munitions in it. It simply was an aircraft, residue of two aircraft and residue of the material used to build this building."

He questioned "why the firefighters who went there and everyone in the city of New York needs to come to the federal government for the dollars versus, quite frankly, this being primarily a state consideration."

"Primarily a state consideration"???

So, in the highly unlikely event that Osama bin Laden is ever captured, does that statement mean that Congressman Issa believes the District Attorney for New York County has first dibs on him (for roughly 3000 counts of murder in Manhattan)??


...From the "Doesn't get along well with others" Department:

It's not enough for the Bush-led Department of Justice to ignore Congress, now it's ignoring the courts, too.

From the L.A. Times -

New federal sentencing guidelines designed to end the racially tinged disparity between prison sentences for powder and crack cocaine dealers went into effect a month ago, and so far more than 3,000 inmates have had their prison terms reduced.

Dozens have been released, including at least 15 in California, but many others who should have been released have not. Attorneys involved in the process blame bureaucratic delays as well as opposition from the Justice Department.

The problem isn't only with the Justice Department, either.

Also from the Times' story -

In Dallas, one judge has refused to allow federal defenders to represent crack offenders in his court, saying they have no right to counsel at this stage of the proceedings. That has left hundreds of inmates having to file jailhouse petitions to gain their freedom.

I suppose some of the crack offenders left hanging (so to speak) by the foot-dragging of the DOJ and the courts *could* appeal directly to George Bush for relief, but looking at the list of his most recent pardons, they shouldn't expect much help in from that direction.

Of the 15 pardons listed, 1 was for marijuana, one for cocaine, one for heroin, and one for distribution of an unnamed controlled substance that pre-dates crack; the others were non-narcotics-related offenses.

No crack offenders to be found.


Later!

4000

Bush's War has reached a grim milestone - when four soldiers died in a roadside bombing Sunday night, the official American death toll there passed 4000. (CNN)

As far as America's historical war casualty totals go (WW1 - 116,000; WW2 - 405,000; Vietnam 58,000; source - fas.org), that 4000 doesn't seem like much, but it's a record for wars that we've started, and started under false pretenses.

Perhaps "4000" may not seem like much to the likes of George "What? Me Worry?" Bush and Dick "Americans think the war is a mistake? So?" Cheney, every single one of those more than 4000 deaths was absolutely devastating to the victims, their families, their friends, and their colleagues.

Of course, Bush and Cheney may feel they just have their eyes on the bigger picture -

In 2002, Halliburton's earnings before taxes number was a loss of $228 million;

In 2007, that number was a positive $3.4 billion. (source: Morningstar)


What's 4000 lives weighed against billions of dollars?


On a related note, I wasn't going to do a "Sunday Morning Crappie Award" post this week, but Arizona's junior U.S. Senator, Jon Kyl, has earned at least an honorary award for his blithely shameless support of the president and his policies while questioning Sen. Barack Obama's 'seriousness' and 'wisdom.'

Somebody should clue Kyl in - there hasn't been any wisdom in the White House since January 2001.

And for that blatant double standard - criticizing the qualifications of a Democratic candidate for president while ignoring the fact that the President he so ardently supports is perhaps the most unqualified man to ever sit in the Oval Office, and one that is unqualified for the very reasons that he cites in criticism of the Democratic candidate - Jon Kyl wins an honorary award of this week's Sunday Morning Crappie.*

* - the award is an honorary one because this isn't really a flip-flop by Kyl. He's been Bush's lapdog for years.

Arizona earns another low rating when it comes to protecting children

This time, it's the state's Congressional delegation that has let children down.

The Children's Defense Fund Action Council has released its 2007 Congressional scorecard. The scoring was based on 10 key votes each in the House and Senate (the list of votes was slightly different for each chamber.)

Arizona's delegation ended up tied for 44th with Louisiana's.

Hey - at least we beat Nebraska, South Carolina, Idaho, Oklahoma, and Wyoming.

On the other hand, Georgia, Texas and Mississippi beat us, and that's not exactly something to brag about.

By comparison, my old home state of Massachusetts ranked 3rd, with an average score of 97%; the only negative marks were due to absences, not bad votes.


As could be expected, the Arizona delegation split along party lines -

In the House, Democrats Ed Pastor and Raul Grijalva each scored 100%, Gabrielle Giffords 80%, and Harry Mitchell 60%.

On the Republican side, Rick Renzi scored 60%, Trent Franks and John Shadegg scored 10%, and the ever-reliable Jeff Flake earned a big ol' goose egg (he's like Mikey from the Life cereal commercial - he hates *everything.*)

It seems that John Shadegg's 'expertise' on health care doesn't extend to healthy children, only healthy corporate bottom lines. As for Trent Franks, apparently his concern for children stops once they are born.

As for Renzi's 60%, well, you knew that there had to be a real reason that a Republican U.S. Attorney pursued an indictment of a Republican Congressman - I mean, there was no way a Bush appointee would go after a Republican for simple extortion and fraud, right?

:))

And as for Harry Mitchell's 60%, I supposed he can take heart in the high-wattage company he's keeping - Nancy Pelosi was also at 60%, Joe Biden was at 50%, Barack Obama 60%, Hillary Clinton 70%.

Over in the Senate, Jon Kyl scored at 30% and John McCain earned a 10%.

Of course, given that McCain missed 8 of the 10 key votes, maybe his grade should be 'Incomplete.' However, according to the 2006 Scorecard, he made all of the 10 key votes that year, and scored a resounding

10%.

Come November, that's something that parents all over the state might want to think about before they cast a 'favorite son' vote in the general election.

Later!

Is Jon Kyl getting 'creative' with his press releases?

Blogger ThinkRight has the text of a press release that Kyl's office issued today, lauding the Senate's passage of an SCHIP extension (S2499).

From ThinkRight's post -

Senate Extends Children's Health Care, Averts Medicare Physician Payment Cuts

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The U.S. Senate today approved legislation that will avert a scheduled 10 percent payment reduction to doctors who provide Medicare services and temporarily extend funding for the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP).

When I first looked into this, I couldn't find any evidence that the Senate had even considered an SCHIP bill today, much less passed one. The only recorded votes concerned the omnibus appropriations bill and a judicial appointment.

I started salivating at the thought of catching the good Senator in a fib, but continued to research, and found this article in the Hartford Courant that indicated that the measure was approved by unanimous consent.

Still, while Kyl's press release may not have been an outright lie, he was rather creative with it.

First, and I give him (or more likely, whichever staffer was relegated to writing the press release) credit for not saying that Kyl voted for the bill, because no Senator actually did vote for it. "Unanimous consent" simply means that none of them expressed an objection to it.

Second, while the press release sort of implies that Kyl supported the bill, it never comes out and says so.

Which is a good thing, because he has never supported the extension of SCHIP.

To whit:

- when HR1591 was passed by the Senate on March 29, he was one of 47 Senators to vote against it. That bill was later vetoed by President Bush and died when the House failed to override that veto.

- when HR976 was passed by the Senate on September 27, he was one of 29 Senators to vote against it. Again, Bush vetoed the bill and the House failed to override the veto.

- when HR3963 was passed by the Senate on November 1, he was one of 30 Senators to vote against it. The bill was vetoed and is awaiting a January override vote.

So with that kind of consistent track record of opposition to SCHIP, why didn't he derail the unanimous consent on the new SCHIP renewal?

Because it protected Medicare reimbursement rates for doctors and health care corporations.

From the press release -

"This legislation prevents a scheduled cut in physician payments..."

Note: I don't actually have a problem with ensuring that physicians receive reasonable compensation for their services, but I find it rather telling that Kyl opposed health care for poor children until his campaign donors in the health care industry* got something.

This does not speak well for Sen. Kyl's character and humanity.

Of course, he's a United States Senator; his 'character' won't be an issue until his next reelection campaign. In 2012.

After all that, I've come to the conclusion that Sen. Kyl needs to give a raise to whoever wrote the press release - it's not just creative, it's a work of art. While never actually presenting an actual lie, the release nimbly avoids actual truth.

Of course2, the ability to give credit where it's due requires a little character, and it's already obvious what I think of Sen. Kyl's character.

* - According to OpenSecrets.org, Kyl received more than $1.2 million in campaign contributions from the health care industry during the 2005 - 2006 election cycle.

Good night...

In case you missed it...

...On December 6th, Arizona's own Jon Kyl was elected by the Republicans in the Senate to the post of Minority Whip in the U.S. Senate.

According to CSPAN.org, "The Whip is a Senator elected by his/her party to count potential votes and promote unity in voting."

So what did the good Senator do on December 7, just a single day later?

He missed the cloture motion on HR6, the Renewable Fuels, Consumer Protection, and Energy Efficiency Act of 2007.

Thanks go out to Senator Kyl for serving that one up. :)

...The Arizona Board of Regents (ABOR) joined the senior staff of the state's three universities (including ASU President Michael Crow) in saying 'up yours' to the students of the state when it approved a sharp tuition increase (7% - 14%, depending on which school and other factors) this week.

Umm, from article 11, section 6 of the Arizona State Constitution (emphasis mine) -

The university and all other state educational institutions shall be open to students of both sexes, and the instruction furnished shall be as nearly free as possible.

The tuition hike comes in the same year that Crow was given a 5-year contract extension at $720K per year (a 25% raise) plus hundreds of thousands in bonuses. [ASU State Press story here]

It looks an awful lot like ABOR wants the students of Arizona to pay for their fiscal irresponsibility. When the universities come around with their hands out, the legislature can always decline to budget more for public higher education; students and their families don't have that option.

How about this - freeze the pay of all university presidents and any employees earning over a set amount (say $100K) and eliminate all bonuses for such employees, all for a period of 5 years.

The 5 year period matches up nicely with Crow's contract, doesn't it?

After that, tie pay raises and bonuses for university management and senior staff to increases in state funding, with total of the raises not to exceed the percentage of increased state funding.

(i.e. - If the lege appropriates 10% more to the universities, the raises max out at 10%.)

Furthermore, bar any raises or bonuses in years with any tuition or fee hikes.

In other words, no more soaking the students and their families.

Yeah, I know it'll never happen.

...Congrats to LD17's Representative David Schapira on being recognized by Governor's Celebration of Innovation as one of the "Tech 10," ten legislators demonstrating "a clear understanding of the role technology can and will play inArizona's economic development."

...Another note on Rep. Schapira - in response to the tuition hike, he will sponsor legislation required a 2/3 vote from ABOR to raise tuition more than 5% or fees more than $200. (See that article on this hike)

Nice idea, but far too gentle. The best way to keep these guys out of students' wallets is to hit them in theirs.

...Bad News/Good News Department -

On Friday, a federal judge threw out a lawsuit brought the state's new employer-sanctions (anti-immigration) law. He said that the plaintiffs should not have brought action against the Governor and state attorney general. Instead, they should have targeted the state's county attorneys who will be responsible for enforcing the law.

Also on Friday, another court, this one in Maricopa County, ordered Sheriff Joe Arpaio to restore full visiting hours for attorneys and court personnel at the county jail. Arpaio had ordered limitations on such visits as a cost-cutting move. The affected attorneys objected because the hours that he left open for visits, 6:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m., conflicted with their court hours.

...The "Potentially Very Good News Department" -

This coming week, both of the chambers of the New Jersey legislature should vote on a proposal there to abolish the death penalty.

This is great news, but everyone should remember that New Jersey isn't exactly Texas when it comes to applying capital punishment - it hasn't carried out an execution since 1963.

Still, it's a great start.

Have a good weekend...

Wonder if Jon Kyl sings in the shower?

If he does, is a certain 70's TV theme song in his repertoire?

Earlier today, the Washington Post broke the story of Sen. Trent Lott's (R-MS) impending retirement. The story included a brief recap of his career, it's effect on the GOP, the likelihood of the seat staying in Republican hands (count on it - MS's governor is a Republican himself), and speculation of the reason for the timing of Lott's announcement (beginning next year, there's a two-year "cooling off" period for outgoing lawmakers before they can become paid lobbyists.)
Most of Lott's story is unimportant to Arizona, except for one significant line -

That set off a round of maneuvering inside the Republican conference to succeed Lott. Aides confirmed that Sen. Jon Kyl (Ariz.), the No. 3 member of the leadership team, is seeking to replace Lott...

Could someone cue up Ja'net Du Bois, a gospel choir, and Isabel Sanford and Sherman Helmsley?

Daniel at Daniel's News and Views already has his take on this news. In his opinion, the biggest effect on AZ will be that between shilling for Big Pharma and Big Insurance, acting as the President's water-carrier on the Hill, and the increase in his Republican Party-related duties, Jon Kyl won't have time available to actually represent his constituents.

In other words (my words this time), we won't notice any difference. :))

...In other news DC Republican news, Vice-President Dick Cheney was defibrillated on Monday.

Relax - I'm not saying anything nasty there. It just means that he had an irregular heartbeat and received an electric shock to correct it.

Of course, the really shocking news is that Dick Cheney *has* a heart. :))

Later!

Press Release of the Day

Courtesy PRNewswire.com -

Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) today released its preliminary analysis of H.R.3222, the Fiscal 2008 Department of Defense Appropriations Act.

The release went on to list 17 or so earmarks that the group considers to be the most "egregious" before closing with a bit of standard boilerplate (emphasis mine) -

Citizens Against Government Waste is a nonpartisan, non-profit organization dedicated to eliminating waste, fraud, mismanagement and abuse in government.

The only problem with the group's assertion that it's "nonpartisan"?

14 of the 17 were sponsored solely or in part by Democrats.

Adding to its credibility problems?

It's a right-wing front group that, among other things, has been used by Jack Abramoff to launder payoffs to Congressmen (Washington Post), served as an industry lobbyist (TampaBay.com), and taken hundreds of thousands of dollars from the tobacco industry to lobby against tobacco regulations (TampaBay.com).

Oh, and Congress.org reports that all of the campaign contributions made by CCAGW's PAC during the 2005-2006 election cycle went to Republicans, including AZ's own Jeff Flake, John Shadegg, and Jon Kyl.

And here I was thinking that Jeff Flake was untouched by even a whiff of the Abramoff scandal.

Guess you learn something new every day. :)

Note: CAGW is the 501c3 charity wing of the non-charity 501c4 Council of the Citizens Against Government Waste (the 'CCAGW' above)

SourceWatch.org has a more complete write-up on CAGW and CCAGW.

Later!

Short Attention Span Musing

...Has the entire MCSO gone rogue? Just a couple of weeks ago, they arrested two journalists from the New Times for publishing less-than-flattering stories about Joe Arpaio and Andrew Thomas. Now they're arresting civil rights/liberties lawyers.

From AZCentral.com -

The legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona on Sunday said his arrest by Maricopa County Sheriff's deputies at a weekend protest was unwarranted and occurred only after he identified himself as a high-ranking officer with the organization.

Daniel Pochoda showed up at a Saturday demonstration in front of Pruitt's furniture store in east Phoenix to observe interaction between protesters and law enforcement officers, he said. He was there at the request of organizer and activist Salvador Reza, who said Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio uses the deputies to intimidate demonstrators.

Wonder if there is any overlap between the list of deputies involved in the New Times arrests and those involved in the arrest of Mr. Pochuda?


...Continuing on the same issue (the arrest at the immigrant protest),Arpaio had a couple of lines in the last week that very effectively sum up the real priorities of our not-so-esteemed sheriff (emphasis mine) -

From the AZRep -

...but Pochoda refused, said Arpaio, who wasn't at the furniture store during the arrest, but appeared there later to respond to media questions.

From the the Rep's Plugged In piece about some Arpaio protesters at a meeting of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors -

Arpaio sat in the front row, fidgeting and screwing up his face.

"They're calling me a racist, they're calling me a Nazi," he later said, holding court for the media. "I don't understand what's happening with the activists out there, they're getting nasty. I'm not going to be intimidated."

Cameras and microphones - apparently, those are more important to him than the Constitution and our civil rights.

BTW - The guy who arrests journalists and civil rights attorneys and who regularly demonizes immigrants, is calling someone else "nasty"???

Pot, meet kettle...


...This weekend, the AZRep ran an article on AZ's political blogosphere. It wasn't a great article, but it wasn't too bad, either.

The biggest weakness of the article was its focus on the 'insider' nature of some blogs while minimizing the 'outsider' heart of most real blogs (lefty or righty).

From the article -

They're snarky, biased, bulldoggish, funny, harsh and sometimes, hard to ignore.

Arizona's political blogs are growing in number and significance, helping to transform the way insiders relate to the news and to each other.

One thing that I can't argue with is its selection of Espresso Pundit, Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion, and Sonoran Alliance as the three of the preeminent political blogs in the state. (OK, I think Sonoran Alliance is a little *too* insider, frequently simply parroting AZGOP talking points. Still, it is pretty well written.)

I would have included Eli Blake's Deep Thought in the list of notable liberal blogs; he's the best pure writer in the AZ blogosphere. Michael Bryan of Blog for Arizona is really good, too. However, he's a lawyer, and a lawyer never says in a sentence that which can he can say in a page. :)))


...Jon Kyl's latest column/press release/diatribe against Democrats includes a great line -

The 2008 fiscal year began October 1, and yet, Congress has not sent a single appropriations bill to the President. Congress hasn’t been this late in two decades.

I guess that he thinks that "late" counts as worse than "not doing the job at all," since he says nothing at all about how the Republican-controlled Congress failed to even pass a budget, leaving it to the incoming Democratic majority to cobble together some continuing resolutions to fund the federal government this year.


...Tomorrow, the House is expected to vote on the most important piece of legislation of the entire session, HRes782.

Call your Congressman or woman and urge them, in the strongest possible terms, to support it.

Oh, what does HRes782 do?

It expresses "the sense of the House with respect to the Boston Red Sox victory in the 2007 Major League Baseball World Series."

:)))


...Anyway, tonight I picked up a copy of Molly Ivins' last book, "Bill of Wrongs - The Executive Branch's Assault on America's Fundamental Rights" and have some reading to do.

Later!

Jon Kyl just doesn't get it, does he?

From an article in Wednesday's Arizona Republic -

In an interview with The Republic, Kyl said leaks take on partisan overtones on Capitol Hill.

Democrats appreciate leaks that embarrass the Bush administration, such as the stories exposing torture and humiliation at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, while Republicans decry them.

But Democrats demanded to know who in the White House leaked the information that Valerie Plame, the wife of an administration critic, worked for the CIA.

"It's a crime to leak classified information, and it should be," Kyl said. "It looks a little bit to me like it depends what the political cause is. If we're for the leak, then we don't want to ever try catching anybody. But if we're against the leak, well, then it's OK."

So somebody help me understand this -

Is he placing the leaks that exposed the crimes committed at Abu Ghraib on the same ethical level as the leaks that endangered the life of the wife of Joe Wilson, the "administration critic" that he spoke of?

Perhaps the more pertinent question is "does Jon Kyl have a moral compass that points only toward the White House?"

Oh, and as an aside, did anyone else notice the 'irony' in how Kyl bemoaned partisanship while he very partisanly defended the retaliation against a critic of the administration?

He just doesn't seem to understand that his job is to represent Arizona's interests, not the White House's.

House bill HR2102, an open attack on bloggers, reaches the House floor next week

H.R. 2102, the Free Flow of Information Act, a bill that I've written about before (here, here, and here) hits the House floor next week, after a brief stop in the Rules Committee.

As I wrote in late August, as submitted the bill would craft a fairly general federal journalist's shield law; as amended in the Judiciary Committee, it would restrict that shield to "professional" journalists only.

From Section 4 of H.R. 2102 as introduced -

(2) COVERED PERSON- The term `covered person' means a person engaged in journalism and includes a supervisor, employer, parent, subsidiary, or affiliate of such covered person.

From Section 4 of H.R. 2102 as amended (emphasis mine) -

(2) COVERED PERSON- The term 'covered person' means a person who, for financial gain or livelihood, is engaged in journalism and includes a supervisor, employer, parent, subsidiary, or affiliate of such covered person.

The 'financial gain or livelihood' language clearly targets non-commercial journalists such as bloggers.

During the Judiciary Committee's deliberations on the amendment, the desire to craft a shield that couldn't be used by terrorists was cited as the justification for the restriction.

However, a couple of clauses in the amended version of the bill give lie to that rationalization, and point toward another motivation - protecting corporate media organizations from burgeoning competition from amateurs on the internet.

First, paragraph 2 of the amended definition of “covered persons” already specifically provides exceptions to the shield for foreign powers, agents of foreign powers, and designated terrorist organizations. As such, the financial gain language is unnecessary.

Second, clause C of paragraph 3 in section 2 of the amended bill overtly places the interests of commercial entities on par with the interests of public safety and national security.

Even in its current form, however, the bill is only a tepid, ineffectual one. A couple of propsed amendments submitted to the Rules Committee seek to turn the current weak bill into an abomination.

From the amendment proposed by Rep. Rick Boucher of Virginia -

Covered Person – The term "covered person" means a person who regularly gathers, prepares...for a substantial portion of the person's livelihood or for substantial financial gain...

It was thought by many, including some members of the Judiciary Committee, that the original amendment would still cover many bloggers because many (though not me!) derive a small income from advertisements on their websites. Adding "substantial" to the financial gain language is an open attempt to close that avenue to protection.

Additionally, the amendment submitted by Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas would lower the threshold of significance that the government would have to meet to compel disclosure of a source. It would lower the threshold so much that disclosure of the source would no longer have to be "critical" or "necessary" to the government's case, just "helpful" or "important."

In short, these amendments would render meaningless the shield crafted by the underlying bill.

Earlier this evening, I wrote a letter to Congressman Harry Mitchell expressing my concerns with the amended bill and the proposed further amendments. In addition, I urged him to try to restore the 'covered persons' definition to its broader original language and to fight the further amendments submitted by Boucher and Smith.

I now urge every blogger and everyone who cherishes true freedom of the press to contact their own Congressional representative, and to do so as soon as possible. The bill is before the Rules Committee on Monday at 5:00 p.m. EDT, and can reache the House floor shortly after that, possibly as soon as Tuesday.

A few other notes on the issue -

...When I called the Judiciary Committee staff in August asking for the specific language in the amendment, they repeatedly put me off, saying that it would be posted in THOMAS within a week or two.

The hearing was on the first of August; the amendment was posted in THOMAS on the 10th of October.

They also later told me that the bill was *not* amended in committee, that an amendment was only discussed and not approved. I thought then that the statement was a lie.

I now *know* it was a lie.

...There is a related bill in the Senate, S. 2035. It contains the original, broader, definition of "covered persons" that doesn't have the financial gain language.

However, in perhaps the least surprising move of the year, Arizona's anti-open government activist Senator Kyl is fighting it tooth-and-nail; don't hold your breath on that bill ever passing the Senate in anything resembling an effective form.

In summary, HR2102 is a weak bill that certain Republicans (what? You though Boucher and Smith were Democrats?!? LOL) are trying to water-down even more. Get the word out to other bloggers and interested folks -

Contact your Congresscritters!! Let them know that you think this bill is already too weak!

Thanks for reading this long post all the way through!

Later!