With a single stroke of the pen, Bush screws poor children and Republican incumbents

...Of course, I'm sure his real target was the poor children; the Republican incumbents in Congress are just 'collateral damage.'


As expected...as threatened...George Bush vetoed HR976, the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007.

The House will probably uphold the veto, as the bill originally passed with a bipartisan 265 - 159 majority. While that's a solid majority, it's still significantly less than the 2/3 required to overturn a veto.

However, there's very little joy in GOPland tonight.

Now the Republican Congresscritters must either go against a Republican President and override the veto, something that they have never done, or are going to have to vote to uphold the veto and choose to sacrifice the health care of poor children (all in the name of 'fiscal responsibility') while supporting Bush's unpopular, immoral, and expensive occupation of Iraq (not only is the war wrong, it sure as hell isn't 'fiscally responsible').

And the Democratic leadership in the House is doing what they can to help the Repubs with their little dilemma - by a 222 - 197 vote, the House postponed the veto override vote until October 18.

That's right, the Republican Congresscritters will have two weeks of arm-twisting from both parties (and not all of the Republicans doing the arm-twisting want to uphold the veto - Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) has already said that he will be calling House members to garner support for an override).

However, Arizona's own John Shadegg (R - CD3) staunchly defended the President's veto in the Hill's Congressblog -

American people deserve to know that the bill isn’t limited to uninsured poor children and should have been vetoed.

BTW - that's his entire defense of the veto; that's the posting in its entirety.

Shockingly (OK, not really :) ) Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) supports the veto, too. His letter to the editor in support of the veto, printed in the AZ Republic is here.

Besides the arm-twisting from the White House and their own colleagues, House members will also have two weeks of their office staffs getting swamped with with calls, letters, and emails (hint hint :)) ).


My favorite line during the debate on postponing the veto override vote (courtesy the Atlanta Journal-Constitution) -

"President Bush is a one-man axis of evil," said Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif., chairman of one of the House subcommittees that helped write the bill. "I am disgusted by his veto of a bipartisan compromise that would have provided care to nearly 4 million uninsured children."

I have to disagree slightly - Bush is not a *one-man* axis of evil, but as evidenced by the unwavering support from watercarriers like Kyl and Shadegg, he may certainly be a leader of one.

Columnist Froma Harrop of the Providence Journal made an observation about the arguments in favor of the veto that others (including me!) have also noted - it always comes back to the profits of private insurers.

Harrop, via the Houston Chronicle -

You see, the writers of the SCHIP legislation worked on the simple-minded idea that the taxpayers could help uninsured children by just picking up their medical bills. They didn't understand the subtle thinking of the Bush administration, which can't support a government program that doesn't also enrich private interests.

Kyl made the argument in his letter to the editor, Rep. Sam Graves (R-MO) used it in his op-ed piece in the Kansas City Star, and the President even cited it in his veto letter to the House.

How is it that the Republicans who, almost to a man, profess piousness and devotion to their particular religion-du-jour, think that no one will notice that they've sold their souls?


Congressional Budget Office analysis of the bill here.

An NPR summary of the issue is here.

AP analysis here.

Blog analysis from AZ blogger and activist Eli Blake here (he's an insightful and skilled writer. I recommend bookmarking his blog, Deep Thought.)

Later!

P.S. - when contacting the offices of the various Congresscritters, be polite.

The interns and low-level staffers answering the phones and reading the letters are *NOT* the Congresscritter that they work for. They don't get paid anywhere near enough for the sh__storm that's coming their way.

Senior staffers and elected officials? Give 'em an earful.

Damn am I going to get grief for that line. :)))

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

and nary a glimpse of Eastwood, Van Cleef, or Wallach... :)

The news from D.C. was a decidedly mixed bag - good news on the Patriot Act front; bad news on continued funding for Bush's war in Iraq, and profoundly ugly news regarding the march to war with Iran coming out of the Senate.

First the good - A federal district court judge in Oregon ruled that two parts of the Patriot Act regarding seaches and intelligence gathering violated the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

From the CNN article on the ruling -

A federal court on Wednesday struck down two provisions of the Patriot Act dealing with searches and intelligence gathering, saying they violate the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures with regard to criminal prosecutions.

"It is critical that we, as a democratic nation, pay close attention to
traditional Fourth Amendment principles," wrote Judge Ann Aiken of the U.S.
District Court for the District of Oregon in her 44-page decision. "The Fourth Amendment has served this nation well for 220 years, through many other perils."

Then the bad - by a 404 -14 vote, the House passed a continuing resolution, H. J. Res. 52, to fund continuing government operations for the fiscal year. The bad parts? The CR included funding for the Iraq war, an issue that the Democratic leadership gave in on with barely a whimper, and also included a provision that condemned the MoveOn.org "General Betray-us" ad. The MoveOn.org condemnation provision passed as an amendment to the CR by a vote of 341 - 79.

Of the Arizona delegation, only Raul Grijalva (D-AZ7) voted against the provision.

As for the ugly, the U.S. Senate passed, by a disgustingly overwhelming margin of 76 - 22, the Kyl-Lieberman amendment to the Defense appropriations bill, HR1585. The amendment includes language telling the President that the Congress approves of using military force against Iran.

The passage of the Kyl-Lieberman amendment totally outstrips the import of the earlier passage of the Biden amendment to HR1585. Biden's amendment supports the creation of a federalist system of government with a strong regional component. It's a toothless 'sense of Congress" bit of fluff, but it is the first significant legislative departure from the Bush Party line, which wants a powerful central government in Iraq.

Of course, it may be possible that one of the reasons that the Biden amendment passed is that Big Oil loves it.

Of course2, I may just be thinking like a typical cynical lib... :))

Later!

Our illustrious Senators, Kyl and McCain, had a busy couple of days...

...spending their time showing that they hold the same amount of respect for the Constitution and detainees in prison camps, the residents of the District of Columbia, and for American servicemen and women in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In short, they have no respect at all for any of them.

On Tuesday cloture motion, they voted to kill S. 1257, the D.C. Voting Rights Act. The Act would have given the residents of the District of Columbia full representation in Congress.

Then on Wednesday, in another cloture motion, the voted to kill an amendment to H.R. 1585, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 that would have restored habeas corpus rights for detainees.

Finally, later on Wednesday, as the bright sparkling star atop their Christmas tree of contempt, in one more cloture vote, they voted to kill another amendment to the Defense Authorization Act that would have limited the length of tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan served by U.S. troops.

I could rant and rave about their votes (and McCain's somewhat surprising backstab of American servicemen and women), but as despicable as their votes were, they aren't the most deserving of criticism over this.

It's time for Sen. Harry Reid to quit giving in to the Kyl, McCain, and the rest of the Republicans by going for a cloture motion to avoid a threatened filibuster; make 'em earn it.

Make them stand up on the floor of the Senate and on national television and hold up the business of the Senate...hell, the business of the entire nation...because they because the find habeas corpus, taxation with representation, and rested American troops all such dire threats to the Republic.

In other words, it's time for Sen. Reid and the rest of the Democrats that were sent to both chambers of Congress to improve things in D.C. to grow spines.


Washington Post coverage, via the Boston Globe, coverage of the tour of duty limits vote here.

AP coverage of the habeas corpus vote here.

Baltimore Sun coverage of the D.C. Voting Rights vote here.

Later!

Interesting comparison...

...when you compare the constituent services of a relative rookie (by D.C. standards anyway) like Harry Mitchell with a grizzled veteran Beltway insider like Jon Kyl, it's reasonable to expect that the veteran will show up the rookie.

Sometimes expectations have nothing to do with reality.

Ya know, many people, including me, have contacted Harry Mitchell over his FISA vote, and continue to disagree with that vote even after hearing or reading his explanation of it.

But disagree with him or not, at least he has responded to the concerns raised by his constituents.

Which is totally unlike another Arizonan sent to D.C. to represent us, Senator Jon Kyl.

Last month, July 12th to be precise, Rajan Zed, a Hindu clergyman from Nevada, was invited to give the morning prayer on the floor of the U.S. Senate. That prayer was disrupted by a group of Christian fundamentalists. who were promptly arrested on misdemeanor charges.

After writing a post about the incident, I wrote a letter to Senators Kyl and McCain, submitting it via their websites.

Today, I received a response from Senator Kyl.

Let me quote from the letter; no, actually let me quote the entire letter -

Dear Mr. [cpmaz],

Thank you for contacting me about Rajan Zed's being permitted to deliver the Senate's opening prayer on July 12. I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with me, and hope that you will continue to keep me informed of your thoughts and concerns.

Sincerely,

Jon Kyl
United States Senator

JK/tjh

This letter is so generic, it could have been sent to people who expressed support for the extremists who nearly caused an international incident with their bigotry!

Say what you want about Harry Mitchell's FISA vote, at least he and his staff are on top of constituent communications; the same cannot be said for Jon Kyl and his staff.

Later!

Should we be surprised?

Is it any surprise that both of our (alleged) senators, Kyl and McCain, were among the 14 senators who voted against S1, the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007?

Note: One good (so to speak) side effect of the financial cutbacks by McCain's presidential campaign is that he really is showing up for work more often these days.

In McCain's defense, however, it should be noted that he stated that he voted against it because it wasn't strong enough.

From an LA Times story, via the Houston Chronicle -

In the Senate vote, all the lawmakers opposing the measure were Republicans, including Sen. John McCain of Arizona. Among the six senators running for president in their parties, McCain was the only one to vote against the bill.

He has long railed against "pork-barrel spending," and he argued that the bill did not go far enough to ensure earmarks would be carefully scrutinized.

"This bill does far too little to rein in wasteful spending," he said.

Couldn't find any quotes from our illustrious junior senator; I'm sure he'll pipe in with something in the next day or two.

Possibly, he was too busy avoiding the limelight at Thursday's hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing where low-level White House political staffer J. Scott Jennings was on the hot seat over the U.S. Attorney firings. [Washington Post coverage here.]

Karl Rove was supposed to be there, but (stop me if you've heard this before! :) ) President Bush cited 'executive privilege' and forbid him from testifying.

Not that Jennings said much; he cited the same 'executive privilege' assertion many times when refusing to answer particular questions. He did talk about the RNC and emails, though.

I'm not sure where Kyl was during all of this; I caught a replay of the hearing on CSPAN and didn't see him. I could have missed him though as Sens. Leahy, Specter, and Schumer seemed to command most of the camera time.

On the other hand, given Kyl's track record as a dedicated Bush water-carrier, even if he was at the hearing, his only purpose would have been to make sure Jennings toed the White House line.

Have a great weekend!

The letter sent to Sens. Kyl and McCain

Whatthehell, I'm awake anyway... :)

The letter, as submitted via their websites -

Dear Senator Kyl,

I am writing to you today in regard to the events of Thursday, July 12, where, on the floor of the Senate, a group of religious extremists tried to shout down the prayer offered by a spiritual leader from another faith.

In a country such as ours that has as one of its founding principles that people will befree to worship peacefully and without fear of persecution, this sort of sectarian intolerance is embarrassing and unacceptable.

I urge you to condemn the behavior of the extremists and to disavow any ties to their umbrella group, Operation Save America.

A message must be sent; one that states that tolerance of other faiths does not diminish one's own faith, but that suppression of one faith inevitably leads to the suppression of all.

Thank you,

[cpmaz]

Note: This same note is also being sent to Sen. McCain.

Personally, the letter seems restrained and reasonable to me; however, I expect some blowback from one or more wingers over it.

Oh well.

Note: I did change the names where appropriate when I submitted the letter via McCain's website. :)

Now, have a great weekend!

The Republican Idea of Religious Freedom...

means that Christian fundamentalists are free to attack and suppress other religions while claiming that they themselves are persecuted when they are held to account for their crimes.

Thanks to Desert Beacon (NV) for the heads up on this one....

Between the Iraq War debate in both chambers of Congress yesterday (and a Democratic happy hour at Papago Brewing last night :) ), I missed this one...

From the Washington Post -

Hindu Prayer in Senate Disrupted

WASHINGTON -- A Hindu clergyman made history Thursday by offering the Senate's morning prayer, but only after police officers removed three shouting protesters from the visitors' gallery.

Rajan Zed, director of interfaith relations at a Hindu temple in Reno, Nev., gave the brief prayer that opens each day's Senate session. As he stood at the chamber's podium in a bright orange and burgundy robe, two women and a man began shouting "this is an abomination" and other complaints from the gallery.

Police officers quickly arrested them and charged them disrupting Congress, a misdemeanor. The male protester told an AP reporter, "we are Christians and patriots" before police handcuffed them and led them away.

Let's be clear - we have the makings of the Taliban or the Saudi religious police or the like right here in the land of 'freedom of religion'; the only difference is that our fanatics claim to be respectful of the rights of adherent of other faiths.

Right up to the point where they put their boots to their victims.

In the interests of helping publicize that which the three village idiots would suppress, from a USA Today blog posting on the event (they got it from the Congressional Record, but deserve credit for helping get it out on the web), the prayer that Rajan Zed gave on the Senate floor -

Let us pray. We meditate on the transcendental Glory of the Deity Supreme, who is inside the heart of the Earth, inside the life of the sky, and inside the soul of the Heaven. May He stimulate and illuminate our minds.

Lead us from the unreal to the real, from darkness to light, and from death to immortality. May we be protected together. May we be nourished together. May we work together with great vigor. May our study be enlightening. May no obstacle arise between us.

May the Senators strive constantly to serve the welfare of the world, performing their duties with the welfare of others always in mind, because by devotion to selfless work one attains the supreme goal of life. May they work carefully and wisely, guided by compassion and without thought for themselves.

United your resolve, united your hearts, may your spirits be as one, that you may long dwell in unity and concord.

Peace, peace, peace be unto all. Lord, we ask You to comfort the family of former First Lady, Lady Bird Johnson. Amen.

Note: Anybody who knows me knows that I'm not particularly religious (the Red Sox are a different kind of faith, one that has actually been rewarded in this life, not the next :) ), so this is not advocacy of any religion, including Mr. Zed's. I do, however, advocate doing everything you can to tick off and ridicule bullies.

While I do not expect a positive response, I will be writing to both AZ senators asking them to condemn this sort of religious intolerance and to disavow any ties with the protestors' group, Operation Save America (formerly Operation Rescue.)

If I actually get a reply from either Senator's office, I'll post it here. Not going to hold my breath. :)

Coverage of the incident from The Hill is here.

YouTube video of the event is here.

Have a great weekend!

Much ado about BS in the Senate this week...

By a vote of 46 - 53, the U.S. Senate today effectively killed the latest immigration reform bill (S1639) by refusing to invoke cloture and limit debate on it.

While I agree that a reform of the U.S.'s immigration policy is needed, don't mourn this bill.

It was garbage anyway.


In a shocking move, both AZ Senators Kyl and McCain voted in favor of cloture.

The 'shock' is that McCain showed up for work...guess there's no rubber chicken on the menu in Iowa or New Hampshire tonight... LOL

It's less of a shock that Kyl was in favor of the bill; while his campaign last year had strong anti-immigrant planks, the engine driving his campaign was fueled by money from the biggest beneficiaries of the bill - Corporate America.


Anyway, even if the bill had passed the Senate (obviously unlikely) and the House (like the nativists in the House would ever allow that to happen!) and was signed into law, well...

It wouldn't have worked.

In fact, no proposal to 'reform' U.S. immigration policy that can pass Congress will ever do anything to 'improve' it (whatever 'improve' may mean), particularly in regard to immigration from Mexico.

That's because the simple truth is that all of the proposals and ideas have the same flaw -

They ignore the root cause of the immigration wave – the abject poverty that defines existence in most of Mexico.

Another factor to consider is that there are three basic groups involved in the immigration debate - the 'open borders/human rights' crowd; the 'deport them all' crowd; and the Chambers of Commerce/'we want cheap labor' crowd.

[I know those labels are a little over-generalized, but they'll do for this post.]

Let's face facts here and admit that no proposal will ever make all three of those groups happy. Most proposals, in fact, focus on appeasing one group.

For instance, this most recent plan was designed to appease the business lobby; hence, the other two groups hated, and killed, it.

So now the question becomes "How do you get a workable plan passed?"

Short answer: Pi$$ 'em all off.

[OK, so a more appropriate phrase is 'construct a compromise'. Don't quibble - I'm on a roll here. :) ]

Any passable proposal has to include features that will annoy each group. Something that will enable them to go back to their bases and say "Hey, we didn't get everything that we wanted, but they didn't either."

For instance:

An aid program that helps Mexico combat its raging poverty will please the 'deport 'em' crowd as well as the 'human rights' crowd because improving the quality of life in Mexico will reduce the number of people risking their lives to cross the border. It would annoy the Chamber of Commerce types because it would decrease the number of people available for their easily-controlled, easily-discarded, and above all, *cheap* labor force.

Note: I'm thinking that a version of the CCC would be perfect for this. The only issue would be making sure that the aid (material as well as financial) isn't siphoned off by corrupt government officials. (The US government telling another that it has to be less corrupt? There's a 'pot meet kettle' moment for the ages. :)) )

Other features that would annoy some while pleasing others, yet still be successfully combined in one program could include:

...increased border security with a provision that anyone trying to cross anywhere but a regular border checkpoint would be detained and deported, even if they had previously attained legal status...

...wage and civil rights guarantees for immigrants. In fact, requiring that all temporary workers brought in under this program get paid at least, say, 125% (or pick a number) of the highest state minimum wage, plus benefits, would go a long way toward encouraging Big Business to reconsider their habit of 'downsizing' American workers in favor of cheaper imported ones.

...and so on.

We'll know that a proposal is a serious one when it tries to address the root cause of immigration while acknowledging the concerns of all of the interested parties; as long as we keep seeing bills like S1639, we'll know that the sponsors of it don't actually want to reform anything.

Later...

p.s. - I know Harry Mitchell supported the Senate bill, but on this one, we're just going to have to disagree. I respect his reasons for supporting the bill, and I respect him, but this was a bad bill.

Senate Republicans earning their campaign contributions today...

Senate Republicans, led by Jon Kyl (R-PAC), successfully protected Big Oil and its profit margins today when they blocked consideration of tax breaks for alternative energy.

By a vote of 57 - 36 (60 needed to pass), the Senate failed to invoke cloture and block a threatened filibuster of the Baucus Amendment to HR6. The amendment would have created the tax breaks for alternative energy and funded them with a tax hike on large oil companies.

Our own Jon Kyl, from an AP article -

"When you put a tax on a business it gets passed on to consumers," argued Sen. John [sic] Kyl, R-Ariz. "Instead of reducing gasoline prices, this bill is going to add to the cost of gasoline."

Nice to see that the hundreds of thousands of dollars that Kyl has received from energy PACs over the years hasn't dulled his keen perception of consumers' needs. (that's sarcasm folks :) )

Senator Kyl - Wouldn't the consumers reap a more valuable long-term benefit by having a choice of different products to meet their energy needs?

Just askin'....

Anyway, I wonder how many campaign contribution checks were signed at the various industry PACs after the vote (not that I'm a cynic or anything. :)) )

Later!

Kyl uses armed guard to bar media from his public office

It's getting a little far down the list of posts at the AZ Rep's Plugged In, so I almost missed this one, but I'm glad I read down the list...

From Plugged In -

The scene was Kyl's central Phoenix office. That's where a dozen of so media members gathered for the promised handoff of a letter - signed by 26 GOP legislators and 302 elected officials, party dignitaries and regular citizens - from Sen. Karen Johnson, R-Mesa, to Kyl's staff (Kyl was not on site).

The letter was in opposition to Kyl's immigration bill, an issue that has generated emotional debate on all sides.

{snip}

Just one problem: An armed security guard posted at Kyl's door barred reporters from entereing the office. So The Insider and others were left to mouth-read through a set of glass doors.

Most of the comments on the Rep's website ignore the 'armed guard denying media access to a public office' aspect of the piece to focus on criticizing Kyl for not being tough enough on immigrants.

Nary a word, either from the commenters or from Kyl's office, about the Senator's continuing disregard and contempt for one of the founding principles of our country - open and accessible government.

I said it last September, and I say it now - Jon Kyl is the most dangerous man in the Senate because of his work toward an imperial, secretive, government.

Hell hasn't frozen over, but...

...the devil is putting on a jacket tonight. :)

In a truly bipartisan show of support for America's beleaguered pharmaceutical companies (only $40 billion in profits for the first 6 months of 2006! The shame of it! Whatever can be done about this corporate poverty?!? source: House Oversight and Government Reform), today the Senate gutted S1082, the Prescription Drug User Fee Amendments of 2007 Act.

The voted added an amendment to the bill, sponsored by Sen. Ted Kennedy, that while still putatively allowing Americans to buy their prescription medicines abroad, requires that the U.S. government certify the drugs' safety before they can be allowed into the U.S.

The government (aka - Bush Administration) has already said that they cannot make such certifications.

The vote on the amendment was 49 in favor, 40 against, 11 not voting.

15 Democrats, including the writer of the original bill, Sen. Kennedy, voted for the amendment. Kennedy stated that he voted for the amendment to help ensure that the bill isn't vetoed.

10 Republicans voted against the amendment.

You know that things are screwy when Ted Kennedy and Jon Kyl (R-AZ) are together on one side of an issue (aye) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Trent Lott (R-MS) are together on the other side of the same issue (nay).

And in an unsurprising development, our own John McCain was one of the 11 who missed the vote. To be fair though, four other presidential candidates also missed the vote (Biden, Brownback, Dodd and Obama).

"Follow the money" is a phrase, that I'm sad to say, should be applied to Democrats, too.

MSM coverage -

AP here.

GlobeandMail.com here.

Later!

And the rankings are in...

Thanks to Taegan Goddard's Political Wire for the heads-up on this...

...courtesy of the National Journal.

[Note: I wasn't going to do this post as it's the type of post that Stacy at AZ Congress Watch usually does, and does very well. However, she skipped this one and covered the Humane Society's Congressional report card.

...Guess she thinks that puppies and kittens are more fun than ideology.

...Guess she's right. :)) ]

The National Journal has published in 2006 Congressional vote ratings and has ranked Congressfolk on a most conservative/liberal scale.

AZ Summary: Trent Franks (with the now-departed JD Hayworth close behind) was among the most conservative of all of members of the House; Jon Kyl was nearly the most conservative in the Senate. Raul Grijalva was among the most liberal members of the House.

The AZ delegation's numbers at a glance:

In the Senate (ranked as 'most conservative) -

Jon Kyl is the more conservative of our two U.S. Senators. He ranked 3rd overall, coming in as tied for the most conservative on economic policy, 19th on social policy, and tied for first on foreign policy;

John McCain is the 46th most conservative. He was 36th most conservative on economic policy, 53rd on social policy, and 42nd in foreign policy.

In the House -

Note: As new members, Gabrielle Giffords and Harry Mitchell are not part of these rankings.

[Key: overall ranking, economic policy votes, social policy votes, foreign policy votes]

Republicans, ranked as 'most conservative':

Rick Renzi (CD1) - 177th, 160th, 159th, 186th

Trent Franks (CD2) - 37th, 67th, 13th, 80th

John Shadegg (CD3) - 144th, 114th, 138th, 144th

JD Hayworth (CD5) - 46th, 88th, 15th, 82nd

Jeff Flake (CD6) - 216th, 182nd, 230th, 230th

Jim Kolbe (CD8) - 166th, 15th, 248th, 188th


Democrats, ranked as 'most liberal':

[Key: overall ranking, economic policy votes, social policy votes, foreign policy votes]

Ed Pastor (CD4) - 75th, 117th, 19th, 102nd.

Raul Grijalva (CD7) - 3rd, 25th, 3rd, 2nd


The only real surprise in all this?

I didn't realize that Jeff Flake is the face of the "reasonable conservative" in D.C. This isn't a dig at him or at his 'conservative' cred; have no fear, I think he is verrry conservative and disagree with him on most social and political issues.

I just didn't realize how much he votes the issue, his constituents, or even his conscience over the party line.

[Hey, it's either that or the Republican Party has moved so far to the loony end of the political spectrum that a staunch social and fiscal conservative like Flake looks like a moderate by comparison.]

Of course, the nutjob wing (aka - 'Coulter Wing') of the Repubs may look at the National Journal's numbers (and this post!) and run someone at Flake during the next primary as punishment for his backsliding.

Good God, I think I just complimented a Republican; even though the compliment is of a 'back-handed' nature, I must be tired.

Good night!

The 9th Circuit gives Jon Kyl a belated Christmas gift

In a decision that may endear the normally-reasonable 9th Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals to Jon Kyl enough to get him to stop trying to dismantle it (S1296, 2005), the Court ruled that federal agents "may use the names of 104 players who tested positive in supposedly anonymous testing in 2003, shooting down the MLB Players Association's attempts to keep the names private."

Naturally, the MLBPA disagrees with the decision and is almost certain to appeal. The press release from MLBPA is here.

The test results were supposed to be confidential and anonymous, and strictly for the purpose of MLB determining the prevalence of steroid use among its players.

I fully expect that if the players knew that the test results and their names were going to end up in the hands of federal investigators, the tests wouldn't have happened in the first place.

The importance of all of this?

If the lawyers of the very well-funded MLBPA can't fight off government lawyers, what chance does a small testing company or even an individual have when government investigators decide to go fishing through the records of other employment-related drug tests? Or other, more general, personal medical records?

The 9th Circuit's decision seems to fly in the face of the Supreme Court's decision in Treasury Employees v. Von Raab, 489 U.S. 656 (1989), in which the Court decreed that "test results may not be used in a criminal prosecution without the employee's consent." No such consent was given here.

This decision, while chilling at first (and second and third and so on) glance, could have the effect of undermining the legality of all employer drug testing programs, because now it can be argued that the tests compel employees and applicants for employment to give evidence against themselves. That in fact, employers are acting as agents of the government when they compel people to incriminate themselves by surrendering body tissues/fluids for testing.

I thought about writing to my Congressman, Harry Mitchell, over this, but decided not to do so. I honestly have to believe that the DLC/Corporatist/Republican-types will very quickly address this with a bill if it isn't overturned on appeal.

While they surely love the idea of the government having access to all non-corporate personal records, they won't stand for anything that imperils corporate control of their employees/prospective employees.

Actually, on second thought, I think I will send the Congressman a letter about this. These federal investigators need to know that people are watching them, and watching closely.

Good night!

News Roundup for Wednesday, November 15

...with some opinions thrown in for good measure. :)

- - - Jack Abramoff went to federal prison today in PA. In an email to friends sent prior to entering the prison, he bemoaned the "nightmare political scandal" that he's involved in. (Yahoo! News)

Awwww.

- - - Robert Novak, like many, keeps associating JD Hayworth's (and others') loss last week with his stance on immigration. (Human Events)

He lost because he was a loud, mean-spirited, arrogant, deceptive blowhard whose favorite topic was immigration.

He lost because he campaigned on fear, distortions, and outright lies.


He lost because Harry Mitchell was a better candidate, and the voters of CD5 recognized that.


- - - The 2008 Presidential Prognostication Pundits are warming up their crystal balls already.

Novak did it, calling John McCain, Governor Tim Pawlenty of MN (both from the Republican side), Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Governor Brian Schweitzer of MT (from the Democratic side) the "winners" of the 2006 election cycle, and John Kerry and Mitt Romney, as well as the aforementioned immigration hawks, the "losers" of the cycle.

Of course, one week before the election, Darth Novak predicted that JD would win reelection.

- - - Of course, the 2010 Governor Guessing Game has begun in earnest, too.

Writing in the Phoenix Business Journal, Mike Sunnucks discusses potential candidates. He specifically mentioned Congressfolk JD, Rick Renzi, Jeff Flake, as well as Mary Peters and Rick Romley as possible Rep contenders, and Phoenix mayor Phil Gordon and AZ AG Terry Goddard as possible Dem aspirants.

Interestingly enough, a couple of us spoke about this very topic just last week. Our conversation was mostly about the Dem contenders, and we came to the same conclusions as Mr. Sunnucks about Phil Gordon's plans.

We saw the same "Phil Gordon is everywhere at once" phenomenon this cycle and thought that his efforts were for one of two reasons:

1. He's trying to increase his name recognition both with the Democratic Party faithful and with the voters in general; or

2. He's an attention whore.

In the end, we agreed that it was likely that both statements are accurate. :)

BTW - Rick Renzi as Governor???? I'm not even sure he'd consider it, unless the State of Arizona begins awarding defense contracts.

Mantech just wouldn't get enough of a return on their investment otherwise.

- - - In what was perhaps the least surprising news of the week, Arizona Senator Jon Kyl was elected as Republican Conference Chairman in the Senate.

- - - Writing in the Arizona Republic, Bob Schuster observes that by elevating uber-conservative Thayer Verschoor to the position of Senate Majority Leader, the AZGOP is sending a message to Governor Napolitano.

That message?? Get ready "for another long, needlessly contentious legislative session."

Anyway, more later!!

One week on...

A few observations and ruminations after a week of digesting the mid-terms...

...Jim Pederson's candidacy for the U.S. Senate proved two things -

1. Jon Kyl is vulnerable.

2. Money alone isn't going to get the job done.

After a slow start, Jim Pederson developed into a solid campaigner, both on stage and on TV. However, most of that development occurred after the primary in September.

Jim, and the AZDems, would have been better served if he had faced a viable challenger in the primary. That would have forced him to grow as a candidate before he directly faced the seasoned campaigner Kyl. It also would have given him the opportunity to frame the talking points of the campaign (Iraq, Iraq, minimum wage, Iraq!) instead of giving Kyl a headstart.

Note to AZDems: Think about this the next time you run an inexperienced candidate, especially against an experienced one.

...When I was looking back at all of my posts this season, the one that I was proudest of was my post on the Central Arizona Water Conservation District race. Of all of my posts, it received the most positive feedback and thanks.

For a brief moment, I suffered from the delusion that I might of had a bit of influence.

That moment lasted until the results for the race came in.

With one exception (Lisa Atkins), every one of the candidates that I thought was most qualified for the board lost. As for every candidate that I thought was unqualified?

They won.

Ugh.

When that many political apparatchiks go for an office with no pay, no power (from the perspective of the general public, anyway) and no visibility, I have to wonder why.

I'll be keeping an eye on things like contract awards from CAP, as well as the effects of the board's actions on the values of land parcels owned by board members and their friends/families/political associates.

...Even more disappointing was the election of Dean Martin as state treasurer. He was 'creative' in the handling of contributions to his campaigns; I fully expect him to be 'creative' in his handling of Arizona's money and investments.

I'd be cheered by the fact that the State Treasurer doesn't supervise Arizona's Auditor General, except that the legislature does supervise the Auditor, and I would be very surprised if they ever allow the Auditor to investigate a Republican treasurer. Especially one that was one of them for a while.

This is another one to keep an eye on.

...Has anybody noticed the fact that Harry Mitchell is ahead of some guy for the CD5 seat?

Just asking. :)

...Oh, and has anybody noticed the fact that Laura Knaperek is soon to be unemployed? At least until some lobbying firm hires her, anyway.

...I hope that everyone who is pressuring JD Hayworth to concede the race stops doing so. Every vote *should* be counted. Period.

We insist on it; in fact, it's a major campaign plank for many campaigns. It's also something that the Republicans oppose almost reflexively.

Let's enjoy the Republicans' squirming now that the shoe is on the other foot.

...On the other hand, as noted by former Congressman, fellow blogger, and head of Harry Mitchell's transition team (YES!!!) Sam Coppersmith, JD is being something of a hypocrite about this. Apparently, in his 1996 race against challenger Steve Owens, JD was ahead by less than 600 votes after the polls closed, and DEMANDED that Owens immediately concede.

I guess that JD doesn't believe that complete vote counts are for Democrats, just embattled, and desperate, Republican incumbents.

...In 2008 news, Sen. Russ Feingold (D - WI) opted out of the race for the 2008 Democratic Presidential nomination.

...In related news, Sen. John McCain (R - AZ) and former mayor of New York City Rudy Guiliani are starting exploratory committees for the Republican nomination. And (courtesy the AZ Rep's Plugged In) Mitt Romney was in town during his unofficial pre-Presidential tour.

Yes, folks, it's already started. :)

Later!