Short attention span musing...

...First and foremost, my sympathies and best wishes go out to Elizabeth and John Edwards and their children. The weeks and months (and years, I hope!) ahead of them will call upon all of the strength and fortitude that they have.

If you want to send along your best wishes, and maybe add to their strength, you can do so here.

Now back to our regularly scheduled snarkiness. :)


...The Fife-ster strikes again, or reason # 275 why Bill Clinton never should have pardoned his thieving a$$ - he's a freakin' loon.

From the AZRep -

"Now a pastry chef and business consultant, [former Arizona Governor Fife] Symington is keying in on the anniversary of the sighting of the so-called "Phoenix lights" by reversing course, saying the lights were really extraterrestrial and that he saw a UFO himself.

"I'm a pilot and I know just about every machine that flies," Symington said Thursday. "It was bigger than anything that I've ever seen. It remains a great mystery. Other people saw it, responsible people. I don't know why people would ridicule it." "

Just a reminder for everyone - this guy supports John McCain for President.


...In a ruling that surprised no one, federal judge Raner Collins ruled that the plan that last year's legislature approved to adequately fund programs and classes for English-language learners is inadequate and violates federal law. He's given the lege until the end of the session to come up with an acceptable plan. The AZRep article is here. An AZ Rep timeline of the whole matter is here.

House speaker Jim Weiers has pledged to continue fighting the court order.

From the AZ Daily Star -

"We're going to continue to fight this to make sure that the people of Arizona are served correctly and that one judge, because of his opinion, is not going to step in the way of common sense and what's right," Weiers said.

I can sympathize with Weiers - he is just protecting the turf of the Republicans in the legislature. After all, who can do a better job of stepping "in the way of common sense and what's right" than the people elected by the Republican Party to do just that??

:)

If the judge wanted the Republican leadership in the lege to take him seriously, he would, very publicly, order the U.S. Marshals Service to find an empty lot in downtown Phoenix (there's plenty of them!) and to build a holding cell for 90 on it.

Think "Tent City" with suits and ties instead of pink boxers.

THAT would make the lege think twice about continuing to treat students, and the court, with shameless contempt.

Plus, if that didn't work, and incarceration became necessary, a couple of days spent in the sweltering June heat, and a couple of nights spent downwind from the banks of porta-potties would have the added benefit of convincing the Reps in the lege that maybe a Democrat in the Speaker's chair isn't such a bad idea. :)


...While it seems like that the White House is going to make Attorney General Alberto Gonzales the fall guy for their ham-handed attempts to interfere with ongoing corruption investigations by firing the U.S. Attorneys heading the investigations, they really should understand that no one's buying it.

At this point, *impeachment* isn't the worst thing that could happen to Bush and his presidency;
Indictment is.

One of the talking points of the Administration and its supporters has been to cite the fact that the various U.S. Attorneys "serve at the pleasure of the President." That may be true, but that phrase doesn't protect him when he obstructs justice.

'Nuff said.

Later!

Date/Location change for Scott Ritter event next week

Bad news, good news (actually very good news)...

First, the bad news: Due to a more pressing committment, jury duty, Scott Ritter is unable to make it to the scheduled presentation and discussion of his book, Target Iran, on Thursday, March 29.

Note: Mr. Ritter did ask for leave to attend the event as originally scheduled. However, whoever is overseeing his jury duty apparently thinks that the justice system there is more important than literate activists here. Talk about screwy priorities. :))

Now, the (very) good news: The event has been rescheduled for Saturday, March 31. Because the Scottsdale library branches have reduced hours of operation on weekends, the event has been moved to the New Vision Spiritual Growth Center, 9659 N. Hayden Road, (southeast corner of Hayden & Mountain View inside the Mountview Plaza).

The time of the event remains the same - 6:30 p.m. reception, 7:00 p.m. program start.

If you have already sent in for tickets, or are interested in doing so, contact the organizers at 480-991-7548 to make or confirm reservations, or for other options in case the schedule change creates a conflict for you.

Thanks to Margaret Hogan, chair of the LD8 Democrats, Jerry Gettinger, vice-chair, and the organizers for the information and for the quick rescheduling of this important event.

Later!

Scottsdale bans political signs in public rights-of-way

Pending the inevitable court challenge or possible legislative action to preempt tonight's action, thanks to the Scottsdale City Council, it is now illegal to post political signs in public rights-of-way (ROW).

After a long and contentious debate that included an attempt to continue the matter for further study, the Council voted 4 - 3 to approve a measure that banned all temporary signs from public property and rights-of-way.

A number of people, both members of the council and of the general public, expressed strong concerns about the free speech implications of all of the proposals (there were three options.)

A couple of Republicans, including the Communication Director of the AZ GOP, Brett Mecum, spoke in opposition to the proposals.

In a not-so-shocking development, they worked an "Iraq" reference into the debate. I was kind of surprised that they didn't try to work in references to same-sex marriage and immigration, too. :)

The primary method that the members of the council and city staff tried to avoid seeming like they were targeting political signs specifically was to insist that these proposals applied to all temporary signs. In fact, one of their dodges used was that the proposals removed references to "political" in the ordinance.

This did not escape notice, however, as Councilman Bob Littlefield noted that "nobody who has followed this debate believes that fiction."

He reiterated his opposition to the proposals. Noting that while he didn't like clutter any more than the next council member, he said that "sometimes principle [free speech] is more important than aesthetics."

Councilman Jim Lane asked rhetorically "if it [the debate] wasn't about political signs, why not exempt them?" Lane also moved to amend the proposal to exempt political signs, but that amendment was defeated 3 - 4.

Vice-Mayor Tony Nelssen also opposed the proposal; in fact, he was the member who moved to continue the matter, but that motion was defeated by a vote of, you guessed it, 3 - 4.

Supporters of the changes from the general public generally cited "visual clutter" or something similar to support the ban of political signs in public ROWs.

Supporters on the council included Councilman Ron McCullagh, the initiator of the entire debate.

He called signs "a blight on the landscape," an assertion that no one present disagreed with. However, many believe that `freedom of speech' concerns supercede 'image' concerns.

Ultimately, councilors McCullagh, Ecton, Drake and Mayor Manross disagreed, and voted for the ban.

In the end, Scottsdale ended up with an ordinance with either be challenged in court or will never be enforced (to avoid a court battle.)

Later!

A new cable channel that's already paying dividends...

...at least for one blogger.

Confession time...

I have a new addiction - Arizona Capitol Television (channel 123 on Cox Cable's Scottsdale line-up).

It's certainly not perfect:

...it's nowhere near as polished as C-SPAN - for some reason, they played a feed of a radio station over the beginning of one committee meeting (to be fair, C-SPAN has lot more experience and a much larger budget);

...the sound quality is lousy in some of the hearing rooms - frequently, viewers can't hear a member's statement or vote;

...and their programming choices are very limited - during off-hours, they keep re-running a movie, "A More Perfect Union: America Becomes a Nation". It beats the filmstrips we had to watch when I was in school, but not by much. Especially after the 3rd or 4th viewing within a few days.

However, since most of us can't visit the lege on a daily basis, even with its imperfections, it's a great tool for seeing things that before were only written about, and then only if they caught the attention of a professional reporter or an intrepid amateur, such as a blogger. :)

For instance, it aired last Thursday's House floor session where Rep. Robson upbraided Rep. Schapira for describing a bill as "terrible" after he himself described Rep. Steve Gallardo as someone who doesn't "know what truth or fiction is in certain respects." It was great to actually see the events that inspired this great post from Tedski at Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion.


I have learned at least one thing from my limited viewing so far - nothing that I have ever written about Republican Sen. Jack Harper even comes close to conveying what an arrogant ass he is.


During the 3/19 meeting of the Senate Government Committee, he regularly snapped at, cut off, and derided members of the public who spoke in opposition to his position on any bill.

I've heard about this behavior pattern from him before, but had never actually witnessed it. It was eye-opening.

It was, at best, unprofessional; at worst, it showcased a public official who possesses an utter contempt for the public that put him in office.

To be fair, he wasn't alone in his contempt for dissent from the public. His tag-team partner, Sen. Robert Blendu, was just as bad.

Maybe they reasoned that while one jerk would stand out, the presence of two jerks would go unnoticed??

If that was the plan, they need to think about Plan B, because Plan A didn't cut it.

Something tells me that the Republicans in the lege are going to question their own wisdom in starting up this channel.

Hope someone at MCDP and/or ADP has a recorder running. [Hint, hint. :) ]

Later!

LD17 Legislators in the news...

In case anybody noticed (and based on the lack of comments on the subject, no one did notice :) ), I skipped last week's compilation post because there was nothing to compile.

This week, there is.

Rep. Ed Ableser -

...On Friday, the AZ Capitol Times had a story about a deal in the lege over a bill to restrict payday lending operations. Ableser was quoted in the Capitol Times article -

Ed Ableser, D-17, said. “If we can protect the individuals who use these services…and make sure no one capitalizes on their hard [financial] times," {courtesy Google}

As is standard for the AZ Capitol Times, the article is behind their firewall; subscribers can log in.

An accessible article from the AZ Daily Star is here. No quotes from Rep. Ableser, though.

...On Thursday, KTAR.com posted a piece with quotes from various legislators regarding their opinions of mandatory jail time for extreme DUI offenders.

From the piece -

Tempe's Ed Ableser thinks the House should get smart about crime prevention. "I believe it's time we stop going down this road of being big, bad and dumb on crime and start taking a smart approach to crime."

Sen. Meg Burton-Cahill - a quiet week as far as MSM coverage went.

Rep. David Schapira -

...He was featured in Sunday's AZ Rep "Political Insider" column.

Rep. David Schapira, D-Tempe, had uttered only four words about a bill on teacher certification fees Thursday when Speaker Pro Tempore Rep. Bob Robson cut him off from the speaker's seat:

"This bill is terrible," Schapira said.

Apparently, calling a bill "terrible" while Robson is at the helm crosses the line.

"We need to stick to terms of collegiality here," he said, chastising the young Democrat for impugning the sponsor of the bill and his motives.

The article went on to describe an example of Rep. Robson treating Steve Gallardo, Democratic Whip, in a manner that was something other than "collegial."

On that note, we'd like to point out that the best zinger delivered during the heated debate over the immigration measure earlier Thursday was delivered by Robson himself from the floor. In a back and forth with Rep. Steve Gallardo, Robson said in his velvety baritone: "Mr. Gallardo, I don't suppose you know what truth or fiction is in certain respects."

Gotta love shameless hypocrisy.

...His latest column for the Tempe community edition of the AZ Rep was published on Saturday.

It focused on education in Arizona and the need for the state to retain its best teachers.

The closing paragraph -

I have committed as the defining principle of my work at the Legislature to make Arizona one of the greatest states in our nation. If we continue to lose the best and brightest minds to other states and other professions, we will have failed. To be the greatest state in the greatest nation, we must focus our energy on education.

Later!

Found: The Bush Administration's Copy of the U.S. Constitution

Finally, after more than six years of torture, domestic spying, imprisonment without trial, kangaroo courts, election fraud, corruption and a general contempt for the rule of law, the Bush Administration has finally found its copy of the Constitution.

Unfortunately, they are using it as a partisan club to try to beat back efforts to expand Congressional representation to the residents of the District of Columbia.

From the WaPo article:

"The Constitution specifies that only 'the people of the several states' elect representatives to the House," said White House spokesman Alex Conant. "And D.C. is not a state."

Could someone point out the clause in the Constitution that allows the Executive to selectively follow it? Inquiring minds want to know. :)

Pertinent reminder:

Friday, March 30 - The Arizona Institute for Peace Education and Research, with co-sponsors the League of Women Voters, present "Voting Rights: The Unrepresented": Explore issues of disenfranchisement from nearly 1 million people in Washington, D.C. to challenges to simply register to vote in Arizona.

7:00 p.m at the AIPER office, 325 S. Rural, Tempe.

Contact the League of Women Voters at 480.966.9031.

Good night!

Harry Mitchell to visit the VA hospital in Phoenix tomorrow

From a press release -

MITCHELL TO TOUR PHOENIX VA HOSPITAL

WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Rep. Harry Mitchell will tour the Carl T. Hayden VA Medical Center in Phoenix this Sunday, March 18 at 2 p.m.

"As we learn about some of the problems in the VA system across the country, it's important to see what capabilities our local facilities have," said Mitchell.

Patrick F. Chorpenning, the Director of the Arizona Department of Veterans' Services, will join him on the tour.

Mitchell serves on the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs, and is the Chairman of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee.

Last month, Mitchell introduced the Dignity for Wounded Warriors Act of 2007, which will help returning troops and eliminate the red tape so many encounter when they return home.

I'm not sure this is a 'general public' kind of event so much as a 'hospitalized veterans' event, though if you happen to know a veteran who's in the hospital and has a concern that he or she would like to bring to the attention of Harry or Mr. Chorpenning, you might want to give them a heads-up.

For more info, contact Congressman Mitchell's district office at 480.946.2411.

Later!

Short attention span musing...

...Hate to disappoint you, but it isn't science:

From the AZ Rep -

Prayer works.

That's the conclusion of an Arizona State University professor who did an analysis of 17 major studies of prayer and its effects on people with psychological or medical problems.

The article goes on the recount how a professor from ASU, David Hodge, did a study that showed a relationship between people recovering from mental or medical problems and intercessory prayer.

Umm, I am most definitely *not* saying that prayer doesn't help, but this study doesn't prove that it does.

A couple of my reservations with the study:

It doesn't show an actual cause-and-effect relationship, nor does it show that prayer exerts any measurable force or causes a force to be exerted by another upon a third person.

It would be nice for a study of the medical and/or psychological benefits of prayer on third parties do have been conducted by a medical doctor or a psychologist, or even someone with a background in biology. However, Professor Hodge, while he does have a PhD, it is a PhD in social work.

From Dr. Hodge's bio page at ASU-West -

Courses Taught
SWG 534: Diversity and Underserved Populations
SWG 598: Spiritual Assessment
SWG 691: Spirituality and the Helping Professions

Achievements & Pursuits
David R. Hodge, Ph.D. is an assistant professor at ASU-west and a senior nonresident fellow at the University of Pennsylvania’s Program for Research on Religion and Urban Civil Society. Dr. Hodge is a nationally recognized scholar in spirituality whose work appears in a wide array of leading journals, including Social Work, Social Work Research , Journal of Social Service Research, Journal of Martial and Family Therapy, Research on Social Work Practice, and Families in Society. He is also the author of the book, Spiritual assessment: A handbook for helping professionals.

I have never met Dr. Hodge, so this is a bit of a guess, but it seems that he conducted a study that found exactly what he wanted it to find.

In the scientific community, that fact can undermine or even destroy a researcher's credibility.

...Don't tell State Rep. Russell Pearce or State Sen. Ron Gould about this, they might get some ideas:

From AP, via the Concord Monitor -

A panel of Georgia lawmakers signed off yesterday on a plan to create a Confederate heritage month, even as legislative leaders reacted coolly to a push to apologize for the state's role in slavery.

State Sen. Jeff Mullis's bill would dub April as Confederate History and Heritage Month to honor the memory of the Confederacy and "all those millions of its citizens of various races and ethnic groups and religions who contributed in sundry and myriad ways to the cause of Southern Independence."

Coming soon to a "strike-everything" amendment near you.

Later!

Bush still plans to invade Iran...

...but he faces a lot more scrutiny from Congress and the public than he did with the Iraq invasion.

With Harry Mitchell signing on as a co-sponsor of HR 1400, the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act of 2007, attention is starting to turn toward the Administration's next target for a preemptive war - Iran.

From a press release -

"Iran 's defiant pursuit of nuclear arms is a threat to the peace and stability of the United States and the world," said Mitchell. "This is a defining moment for the United States, and for Congress. It must be a national priority to prevent the Iranian regime from acquiring a nuclear weapon."

The Iran Counter-Proliferation Act calls for enhanced U.N. Security Council efforts in response to Iran's continued defiance of the international community and expands bilateral sanctions against Iran by severely limited the export of U.S. items to Iran. Furthermore, the legislation prevents U.S. subsidiaries of foreign oil companies that invest in Iran 's oil sector from receiving U.S. tax benefits for oil and gas exploration.

In a stroke of good timing, this subject is coming to the fore just two weeks before former U.N. weapons inspector Scott Ritter will be here to discuss his latest book, Target: Iran.

In the past, Mr. Ritter has criticized, correctly as it turns out, the President's rationale for a preemptive war in Iraq, weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Ritter said that they didn't have any; Bush said they did.

Bush went ahead with the war, and after thousands of American servicemen and women, and tens of thousands of Iraqis, were killed or wounded, we came to find out that there weren't any WMDs in Iraq, much less WMDs that endangered the U.S.

In the past, he has described, also correctly as it turns out, the vast internecine tribal and sectarian ties and rivalries that Saddam Hussein navigated and used on his way to power and that currently stymie any efforts to bring stability to occupied Iraq. [Endgame]

His knowledge of both Iraq and Iran and of U.S. government plans for them add to his credibility, as in his current book, Target Iran, he chronicles the Bush Administration's drive for regime change, not disarmament, in Iran.

In the book, he calls for a public scrutiny of the Bush Administration plans in regard to Iran. From the book -

"It is essential, therefore, that Iran not be removed from the public debate here in the United States. War with Iran must be discussed, because the ultimate policy objective of the Bush administration regarding Iran is war." [p. 201]

His visit to the Civic Center Branch of the Scottsdale Public Library on March 29 is a perfect opportunity to be a part of that public discussion.

Details -

He will be appearing in the auditorium of the Scottsdale Civic Center Library, 3839 N. Drinkwater Blvd. There will be a reception at 6:30 p.m., with the program starting at 7.

Sponsors: LD8 Democrats, Ronn Lavit, Esprit Decor
Tickets: $25.00 (Minimum suggested donation)/Students: $15.00
Contact: 480-991-7548 or 602-266-5823.

If you are interested in buying a book to read beforehand, I know that Changing Hands still has some copies. It where I bought mine. :)

Addendum:

A transcript of an October interview from Democracy Now! with Ritter is here.

A November article from The Nation titled "The Case for Engagement" that was authored by Ritter is here.

Good night!

Pot, meet kettle...

Good God, I love irony.

From Reuters -

TRIPOLI (Reuters) - Libya's government denied on Wednesday a U.S. accusation that it practiced torture, saying its judiciary was independent and human rights were protected.

{snip}

The U.S. report also said the state restricted civil liberties and freedoms of speech, assembly and association.

The United States would never commit or condone torture, and does everything it can to root it out and bring it to light, right?

Not so much.

From AP, via the Jackson News-Tribune [emphasis mine] -

WASHINGTON - Reporters will be barred from hearings that begin Friday in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for the 14 suspected terrorists who were transferred last year from secret CIA prisons, officials said Tuesday.

A New York-based human rights group that represents one of the 14 men accused the Pentagon of designing "sham tribunals." The organization contended that its client, Majid Khan, has been denied access to his lawyers since October 2006 "solely to prevent his torture and abuse from becoming public" and to protect complicit foreign governments.

Or from the International Herald Tribune [emphasis mine] -

GENEVA: The United States and Cuba on Wednesday accused each other of hypocrisy in professing support for U.N. human rights experts.

The U.S. delegation told the 47-nation U.N. Human Rights Council that it had been surprised to hear Cuban Foreign Minister Felipe Perez Roque strongly backing the panel's experts who investigate specific abuses — like torture, freedom of expression or arbitrary detention — around the world.

{snip}

A Cuban delegate responded that the United States was also selective in its cooperation, refusing to allow experts to meet individually with terrorism suspects detained at Guantanamo Bay.

Rodolfo Reyes said Washington should allow U.N. experts unhindered access to what he called the "international center of torture" in Guantanamo. Last year the United States declined to allow a team of experts — including one on torture — to have private access to the Guantanamo detainees, and the experts refused to go.

Or from...oh, never mind. Citing more examples could go on for hours.

My only question is this: At what point does irony become hypocrisy?

On edit, March 15:

Jobsanger in Texas has a similar take on a different example of this phenomenon, this time involving China.

The Bush administration may be hypocritical, but no one can say they aren't consistent.

End edit.

A very cool day...

...and no, I'm not talking about the weather (90+ degrees).

Today I was privileged to spend most of the day with Bob Mings (former D17 Dems chair and father of the current chair) as we shadowed Rep. David Schapira during his day at the legislature.

Bob and I arrived at the lege at around 9 (a remarkably easy drive - Bob knows his Phoenix commute) and met up with David.

We spent the first part of the visit on a brief tour, with David introducing us to various members of the lege in the halls.

After that, we sat in his office (small, but he's made it very functional) as he explained various aspects of the legislative process. For instance, I didn't know that "third read" was also "final passage"; I had thought they were separate. We also got to witness a lobbyist (I'm sure he has a different job title) from Tom Horne's office try to persuade David to support a bill that he had reservations about. Also of interest was watching him work to find a way to spring his HB2206 (Teacher Shortage Student Loan Program) from being held in the rules committee with the other bills that have appropriations attached to them. There's a glimmer of hope, but only a glimmer. It's pretty near impossible for a Democratic-sponsored bill that has an appropriation attached to it to get past Speaker Jim Weiers.

No matter how good the bill is, or how cost-effective the expenditure.

[Personal note: This is just my opinion, but how did we elect as Superintendent of Public Instruction someone who hates public education? ...Yeah, I know - he had an "R" next to his name on the ballot. Still... :( ]

After that, we spent 90 minutes or so in the Democratic caucus as various bills were discussed. In many cases, the caucus meeting is the first place that a lot of members hear about the bills that they will be voting on soon. Given that, between the House and Senate, more than 2000 bills, resolutions, and memorials were introduced this session, the caucus is a vital tool for legislators.

And that number doesn't even include "strike everything" amendments.

Lunch was courtesy of the March of Dimes. One of the bills they have been lobbying for is HB2156, a bill to fund a folic acid education program targeted at women of childbearing age.

Note: During lunch, we saw Sen. Meg Burton-Cahill. Her recovery from surgery is progressing - she's out of the wheelchair and into a walking boot and crutches. Whooo hoooo!

We also saw the other LD17 legislator, Rep. Ed Ableser, throughout the day. He stopped by to talk with us for a while; but like the other legislators there today, he was very busy trying to raise support for good bills and opposition to bad bills.

After lunch was today's third reading calendar of 23 bills.

Most passed without much discussion on the floor; by this point in a bill's life, most of the members have formed an opinion of it. There were, however, a few interesting moments.

HB2498, a bill that was originally a 'technical correction' to Clean Elections; after a strike-everything amendment from Kirk Adams, it is now a bill designed to destroy Health Care Group (HCG). HCG is a part of AHCCCS for employees that are self-employed, working for small businesses, or are working for 'political subdivisions.'

Yes, the Republicans want to kill a program that benefits small businesses. Who'da thunk it??

Strong opposition to this bill from the entire Democratic caucus as well as some Republicans was enough to make the Republican leadership pull the bill from the agenda - they didn't have enough votes to get it to pass and they want more time to twist the arms of their caucus members.

Also skipped, and I'm not sure why, was HB2708, a bill to change tax valuation tables for property used for natural gas fired electric generation facilities. I don't know all of the background of this bill, but it reeks of 'special legislation' - legislation designed to benefit one company. Special legislation is illegal, but that detail is easily dealt with by simply crafting a bill that doesn't name a company but is worded in a way that only one company could possibly qualify.

A disappointment was the passage of HB2757, a bill that allows health insurance providers to exclude coverage for certain services that are currently mandated by statute. Among the services that health insurance providers could exclude under this bill?

Maternity coverage for mothers who are giving up their kids for adoption.

The bill passed 32 -25; every Democrat present voted against it, every Republican voted for it (there were 3 members absent.)

Even someone at partisan as me doesn't think that *every* Republican in the House is this heartlessly corrupt. There had to be some serious arm-twisting in the Republican caucus to gain passage of a bill this rancid.

The highlight of the day was the defeat of HB2382, a bill to raise the fees that teachers have to pay for state-mandated certification tests. Apparently some in the House didn't think that underpaying and overworking teachers was enough of a knife in the back; they thought a bill that twisted the knife was appropriate.

When we (Bob and I) were sitting in Rep. Schapira's office and walking in the hallway with him, this was one of the bills that he discussed with other reps. His hard work paid off, as the bill was defeated on a 26-31 vote.

The bill could still come back as a strike everything amendment to another bill, but this was a victory worth savoring a little.

All in all, it was a great day. David was a great host - he was patient and informative, and he always included us in what was going on (hey, it's called "shadowing" for a reason. :) ).

If any of you have the opportunity to do something similar, DO IT. It's a great experience, and for those of you in the blogging business, seeing some of the 'mundane' activities that go on at any legislature (i.e. - caucus meetings, committee meetings, etc.) can only enhance your understanding of the subject you write about.

Good night!

P.S. - When I said that the highlight of the day was the defeat of HB2382, I fibbed a little.

One thing I neglected to mention was that David obtained floor privileges for Bob and I, and then introduced us at the start of the Third Reading Calendar.

That was seriously cool, and a complete surprise.

Thanks Rep. Schapira!!

Later!

Cheney's company moving on out...

From the International Herald Tribune -

HOUSTON: Halliburton, the big energy services company, said on Sunday that it would open a corporate headquarters in the United Arab Emirates city of Dubai and move its chairman and chief executive, David J. Lesar, there.

According to the company, the move is simply a response to changes in its market, but I have one question.

Do Dubai and the United States have an extradition treaty??

Later!

Harry needs to learn the D.C. way

because it's obvious that he doesn't have the proper attitude yet. I mean, he chaired an entire three-hour hearing without pontificating.

That's just *not* the way things are done in Washington. :)

{mostly crossposted from Progressive Waves AZ-05}

Today, Congressman Harry Mitchell chaired a meeting of the House Veterans Affairs Committee's Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.

The subject on the agenda was "Servicemembers Seamless Transistion into Civilian Life - The Heroes Return" and the witness list included a number of VA administrators, workers, and veterans and/or family members of veterans.

The complete witness list can be found here.

Audio Coverage can be found at the link. [Note - The hearing was over 3 hours long. If you listen to it, plan accordingly.]

[Note: I didn't listen to the whole thing; I tried to focus on Harry.]

Harry was pretty low-key and professional during the hearing, in that he didn't use the occasion to start speechifying (is that even a word? LOL); he just asked direct questions, particularly about patient complaints.

To those questions, the responses of Michael Kussman, Acting Under Secretary for Health, Department of Veterans Affairs, mostly ranged from "that's handled at the local level" (regarding specific complaints) to "I'll get back to you" (regarding the number of patient complaints per month.)

BTW - Harry's best quote of the hearing: "I think that it is our duty as a nation to do everything that we can to give them the finest care that we can."

The most entertaining part of the entire hearing occurred relatively early in the hearing - Rep. Steve Buyer (R-IN), the ranking member of the Veterans Affairs Committee, but not specifically assigned to Oversight and Investigations, complained that the makeup of the panel was disrespectful to Secretary Kussman.

Apparently, the House has a rule stating that a political appointee shouldn't have to be part of a panel with an enlisted member of the armed forces or a former VA employee (Both PFC Kimberly Lain and Paul Sullivan, formerly a project director for the VA, were also supposed to be part of the first panel). Congressman Buyer cited "Rule 11" but I couldn't find anything applicable online, so I don't know the text of the rule.

After a brief consultation and recess, PFC Lain and Mr. Sullivan were asked to sit on the 2nd panel.

Congressman Buyer (R-Snot) should be proud of himself - he did yeoman's work protecting bureaucratic propriety.

Anyway, a prime focus of the first panel was the lack of communication between the DOD and VA, especially in the area of transitioning veterans. It seems that the VA's computer systems aren't capable of downloading medical records from the DOD.

During the 2nd panel, PFC Lain, who was injured in basic training in the summer of 2005, spoke about her and other soldiers' frustration at dealing with the bureaucracy or not even being told exactly what they need to do to move their evaluation process along. She cited as one example the fact that while injured servicemembers need hard copies of their medical records for the evaluation boards, they don't actually get those hard copies unless they specifically ask their doctor for them. Frequently, by the time they were aware of that need, their doctor no longer had access to the needed records.

She noted that while her care at Walter Reed was great, her treatment after she was discharged from the hospital was almost the polar opposite.

Her frustration continued until she ran into a DAV (Disabled American Veterans) counselor who assisted her in navigating the labyrinth of VA bureaucracy.

She is now due for a medical retirement in short order.

Many of her complaints were echoed by the 3rd panel's Kathy Pearce of Mesa, Arizona, mother of Sgt. Brent Bretz. In 2005, Sgt. Bretz was severely wounded in Iraq by an IED.

Like PFC Lain, she complimented the Army doctors involved with the case; Sgt. Bretz' care in the immediate aftermath of his injuries was "world-class". But like PFC Lain, her opinion of the DOD's and VA's aftercare efforts is significantly lower.

At the beginning of her testimony, she noted that her son is in a better position than most other injured returning veterans - she was and is in a position to help him. But that advantage only goes so far.

Like PFC Lain before her, of all of the issues Ms. Pearce talked about, perhaps her biggest complaint is with the "interminable" bureaucracy. She recited a laundry list of problems, including outpatient care that didn't meet the "unique needs" of her son, "red tape" both at DOD and VA, and "overloaded caseworkers."

In response to a question from Congressman Tim Walz (D-MN) (and others), she advocated both for a status between "inpatient" and "outpatient" and for "transitional housing" on both the VA side and the DOD side of the process. A lot of the difficulty for her son and for the others is in the transition from "24/7" care to none at all.

Congresswoman Ginny Brown-Waite (R-FL) was concerned with if she (Ms. Pearce) "brought this to the attention of [her] member of Congress?" [Actually, this makes Rep. Brown-Waite sound worse than she really was. In fact, she wasn't too bad (not as bad as Buyer, anyway) but by leading off with a question like that one, she appeared to be trying to put some blame on to the victims of the DOD's and VA's shoddy care, instead of the perpetrators of it. The rest of her questions were better.]

Ms. Pearce answered that she had contacted her Senators, but not her Congressman.Overall, as is usual with these sorts of hearings, the juicy stuff wasn't in the prepared statements, it was in the Q & A part of the program. At one point, Rep. Bob Filner (D-CA), the chair of the Veterans Affairs Committee, started barking at one of the panelists. (I didn't catch which one, though.)

If you have the opportunity to listen to the hearing, it should worth your while. Just skip the prepared statements. :)

MSM coverage of the hearing here (SF Chronicle) and here (Knoxville News Sentinel).

...In a related story about the Defense Department's latest brilliant recruiting tactic, the New York Times has a story about how returning National Guard and Reserve members receive far less help with their disability claims than do active-duty members.

Veterans face serious inequities in compensation for disabilities depending on where they live and whether they were on active duty or were members of the National Guard or the Reserve, an analysis by The New York Times has found.

Those factors determine whether some soldiers wait nearly twice as long to get benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs as others, and collect less money, according to agency figures.

These stories have been floating around since the beginning of the war in Afghanistan; maybe with the current furor over the general quality of care provided by the VA, somebody will pay attention to them.

Later!

Pardons and pressure

The Washington Post is reporting that President Bush is "deflecting" pressure to pardon convicted former White House staffer I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

Seems he wants to wait until after the appeals process, which, not so coincidentally, could last until near the end of his (Bush's) term, when a pardon for Libby would be less of a political liability.

Bush did not rule out a pardon but implied that it is not imminent. "I'm pretty much going to stay out of it until the course -- the case has finally run its final -- the course it's going to take," he told Univision during an interview before a trip to Latin America that begins today.

Of course, his defense attorney (one of them, anyway) thinks that he should have already been pardoned -

...attorney William Jeffress Jr. said in an interview. "Now, I've seen all the calls for a pardon. And I agree with them. To me, he should have been pardoned six months ago or a year ago."

Still others feel that the issue isn't with Libby's actions, but with the prosecutor's (Patrick Fitzgerald) -

Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott (Miss.) said: "It's a terrible miscarriage of justice and abuse of prosecutorial power.

So far, I haven't seen evidence to support that assertion, but if anyone should recognize an abusive prosecutor, it's a Republican.


Interesting that a pardon is even being considered at this point.

Bush's own policy toward pardons would seem to work against the idea of pardoning Libby before he serves prison time -

Bush has granted 113 pardons over six years, nearly a modern low, and has never pardoned anyone who had not been released from prison.

This might be a great opportunity to start a bipartisan push (remember the furor over Clinton's pardon of Marc Rich? It'll be easy to get the support of some Republicans for this.) to place some minor limits on the power of the President to issue pardons.

Note: In a bit of delicious irony in the event that Libby does receive a pardon, it should be noted that he was Marc Rich's lawyer.

A few suggested changes to Presidential pardons:

- - - No preemptive pardons. The recipient of the pardon must have actually already been convicted of the crime for which the pardon is issued. Sorry President Nixon.

- - - No secret pardons. Next up: no secret trials.

- - - If the recipient of the pardon is a government employee, or presidential campaign or political party contributor, no pardon could be issued until the convict had served at least 5 years in prison. In the case of a sentence of less than 5 years in prison, no pardon could be issued until the conviction had stood for at least 5 years.

Call this the "Marc Rich" clause. And the "Scooter Libby" clause.

- - - In addition, for government employees/campaign contributors, the pardons would not be complete, they would be conditional. If the recipient were to later re-offend, the pardon would be vacated, the original conviction re-instituted, and the convict would forfeit any eligibility for pardons in the future.

Call both of these the "we don't want the fall guys; we want the big kahunas" clauses. And the "don't get dirty again" clauses.

Will these or any other changes to the scope of Presidential pardons happen during this Administration? Almost certainly not - if this President and his staffers were honest enough to implement such changes, they wouldn't be needed in the first place.

Plus I'm not sure our prison system, regardless of how rapidly it's growing, would have enough space to hold all of the criminals working for the current Administration.

Later!

Harry Mitchell (CD5) to deliver weekly radio address for the Democrats

From a press release -

WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Rep. Harry Mitchell will deliver the Democratic Radio Address this Saturday and will discuss congressional efforts to address the poor care our troops have received at Walter Reed Army Medical Center and other facilities when they return home from Iraq .

In addition, he'll be holding a hearing into the poor conditions at Walter Reed and elsewhere. The hearing will be held in 334 Cannon HOB. The audio feed for that meeting room can be found on this page.

Note: I can't find a Phoenix radio station that is planning to air the address, but I'll post a link to an online outlet when one becomes available. I'm sure the DNC and AZDems will have it, even if a local station doesn't.

The radio address is significant for at least two reasons - again, it illustrates the esteem that his colleagues hold for Harry and, even more importantly, it shows that the Democratic majority in Congress isn't going to let go of the issue of how shabbily the Bush Administration has treated veterans returning from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Good night!