Ezra thinks the deal isn't terrible

Read him. Too late to summarize. Read the rest of this post...

Cult-run paper Wash Times fires 40% of staff, no longer will do "reporting"

When did the Washington Times ever do reporting?

[A]las, after nearly three decades of unrelenting financial losses, the Rev. Sun Myung Moon, a federal tax cheat, accused cult leader, and founder of the Unification Church, has decided to pull out. Actually, according to news reports, it's more like Moon's U.S. college-educated sons, as part of an internal family power struggle, have decided to finally cut off the endless stream of Asian church cash that's kept the Washington Times afloat.

With the announcement that 40 percent of the Times' staff is getting pink-slipped, and that the daily's no longer even going to bother with traditional who/what/where/when/why reporting, instead publishing an opinion-heavy publication that will be free of charge at a diminished number of local outlets, Times owners look like they're angling to be a Weekly Standard wannabe, churning out lots of predictable GOP Noise Machine opinion prattle. What is clear is that the daily's days as a functioning newspaper are now over.

R.I.P. The Washington Times.

Read the rest of this post...

Twitter

Joe and I are both on Twitter.

The first two accounts are our personal accounts - we retweet a small amount of the blog content, but it's more original tweets and other stuff we like from around Twitter:
John: @aravosis
Joe: @joesudbay

These two accounts tweet the content from our main blog, and our gay sub-blog, as it's posted:
AMERICAblog: @americablog
AMERICABlog Gay: @americabloggay Read the rest of this post...

UPDATED: Senate Dems. drop "alter" (bua really drop) public option

NOTE FROM JOHN: It always inspires confidence when we spend how many decades studying this issue, how many months working on it, and then in the last 48 hours, they come up with an entirely new plan because none of our leaders was willing to actually fight for the real plan.

UPDATE: The New York Times has updated the title and first paragraph of its report:

The Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, said on Tuesday night that he had reached “a broad agreement” among a group of 10 Democrats who have been working to resolve the dispute over a proposed government-run insurance plan that has posed perhaps the biggest obstacle to major health care legislation.

We'll have to wait for to officially find out that the public option has been altered into something that isn't even close to being a public option. Details are beginning to leak out:

But Democratic aides said that the group had tentatively agreed on a proposal that would replace a government-run health care plan with a menu of new national, privately-run insurance plans modeled after the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program, which covers more than eight million federal workers, including members of Congress, and their dependents.

A government-run plan would be retained as a fall-back option, the aides said, and would be triggered only if the new proposal failed to meet targets for providing affordable insurance coverage to a specified number of people.

The agreement would also allow Americans between age 55 and 64 to buy coverage through Medicare, beginning in 2011.

Got that? Senators don't live in the real world. It's hard to imagine a group of Senators will, under pressure, come up with something that actually works.

And, expect a debate about what the defintion of "public option" is.
___________________
Despite broad support for the public option among the public, Democratic Senators aren't going to have the provision in their bill according to The New York Times:

The Senate majority leader, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, said Senate leaders “have a broad agreement” on dropping a government-run plan from the health care bill, and that the Congressional Budget Office would review the implications of such a move on the budget.

“I told head of C.B.O. we would send him something he would have to score,” Mr. Reid said. He added that he had asked Senators Charles E. Schumer and Mark Pryor to work together with a group of liberals and moderates on making sure the health care bill has a vehicle to expand coverage to achieve the aims of the so-called public option.

Not a surprise, but still somewhat stunning just how much control the insurance industry has over Congressional Democrats. Indeed, this is a "WIN" for the insurers. We lose.

We needed leadership here. We didn't get any. Read the rest of this post...

'45 minute to WMD' claim from a taxi driver

The story only gets worse by the day. Tony Blair and the US Republicans worked everyone into a frenzy over the "45 minutes and we could all die" story and now we see just how ridiculous it really was. How are these people not prosecuted for abusing their power and terrorizing everyone with their lies?

Today, in an interview with the Daily Mail, Holloway said the key piece of information about 45 minutes came from an Iraqi officer who was using a taxi driver as his own sub-source.

"[MI6] were running a senior Iraqi army officer who had a source of his own, a cab driver on the Iraqi-Jordanian border," said Holloway, a former Grenadier Guardsman and television journalist.

"He apparently overheard two Iraqi army officers two years before who had spoken about weapons with the range to hit targets elsewhere in the Middle East."

Holloway made his comments to coincide with the publication of a report he has written claiming that MI6 always had reservations about some of the information in the dossier but that these reservations were brushed aside when Downing Street was preparing it for publication.

Read the rest of this post...

Obama says Dem. Rep. John Conyers "demeaned him." Conyers isn't backing down.

From The Hill:

According to the lawmaker, the president picked up the phone several weeks ago to find out why Conyers was “demeaning” him.

Conyers, doesn't seem to be backing down, having just said the following:

“Calling in generals and admirals to discuss troop strength is like me taking my youngest to McDonald’s to ask if he likes french fries,” Conyers said.

Many on the left have argued that military leaders routinely respond to crises by calling for more troops.

“I’ve been saying I don’t agree with him on Afghanistan, I think he screwed up on healthcare reform, on Guantánamo and kicking Greg off,” Conyers said, referring to the departure of former White House counsel Greg Craig.

This is interesting, as it suggests Conyers hardly started out as "an Obama hater."

Conyers was the first member of the Congressional Black Caucus to endorse Obama over then-Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) for the 2008 Democratic nomination for president.

I think the President handled this poorly. I'm not entirely sure that anyone should have called Conyers at all about "demeaning" the President, let alone the President himself. That call, and the language involved ("demeaning me" - I've not heard that exact construction before, it sounds a bit like "you're being mean to me"), suggest that President Obama has a thin skin, that he cares too much about what others say and think of him. It also reinforces something Joe and I have been noting for a while - that the way to get noticed by the Obama administration is to challenge them publicly. "You lie!" comes to mind - which was immediately followed by an effort to "fix" the bill to address Joe Wilson's concerns.

What doesn't work, apparently, is working with them behind the scenes. Conyers would never have spoken out publicly without first having tried to work things out privately. It's the way things work in Washington. It's the way Joe and I approach the advocacy work we do, especially on gay rights issues. First you attempt to fix the issue privately, then when you're left no option, you go public. The fact that John Conyers, an early Obama supporter, felt the need to go public, repeatedly, and in a rather harsh manner, suggests that relations between the Obama administration and the Hill are deteriorating, and that efforts to repair them privately have been for nought. Read the rest of this post...

Nelson's anti-abortion amendment fails in Senate, 54-45

But, as TPM reports, Nelson may join a filibuster of the health care bill since he didn't get his way. That means the Dems will need at least one Republican to break the filibuster - and that assumes all the other problematic Dems and independents (Lieberman) go along. It's a mess. And it means that we should expect the bill to likely be watered down even further. Read the rest of this post...

Palin will consider third party

That basically means that she puts her own ambition above the party. What would Ronald Reagan say? Read the rest of this post...

So much for "fixing the bill in conference"

For a while now, whenever we've written about concerns that President Obama wasn't sufficiently supporting his own campaign promise, the public option, many of the President's defenders told us to fret not, the President had a plan, and it involved fixing the bill in conference, where the public option would be magically saved. Now it's increasingly sounding like there may not be a conference at all.

As I wrote in the post below, some liberal Democrats in the House aren't at all happy with the direction of the Senate's health care bill. And, that is especially important because there's an increasing chance that the Senate bill will be the final product.

A couple weeks ago, I wrote about the proposed idea of a mini-conference:

Over the course of the debate on health insurance reform, we've been told not to worry so much about what passes in the House and Senate, because it will all be fixed in the conference committee. Well, we're in the middle of November and have yet to see the Senate bill (although it's expected later today.) All the delays by Blue Dogs and conservative Democrats like Max Baucus and Kent Conrad taken a toll and have cost momentum. There's pressure to just get something done -- and when that kind of talk starts, it's never good. Now, there's talk that instead of a real conference committee, we might see a "mini-conference" of just leadership to get a bill done quickly.

Now, we've gone from "mini-conference" to "ping pong" according to Ryan Grim:

The health care reform bill that passes the Senate might be the one that ends up on President Obama's desk, bypassing the usual House-Senate conference committee and avoiding another 60-vote threshold to end a filibuster.

There is increased chatter on Capitol Hill about a possible "ping-ponging" of the Senate health care bill: that chamber would pass its health care bill, send it to the House and the House would be asked to pass it with no changes and send it directly to the president.

That limits the options of congressional critics -- under the usual procedure, lawmakers dissatisfied with the bill pushed through their chamber can win changes through adroit political maneuvering in conference committee negotiations.

Either way, the purpose is to limit opportunities to improve the bill that finally emerges from the Senate. So much for fixing it in conference. The House liberals should be holding some cards right now. Rahm Emanuel needs every single one of them. Read the rest of this post...

House liberals aren't happy with direction of Senate bill

In the health insurance debate, all eyes are on the Senate right now. But, let's not forget, as that bill continues to become more conservative, there's still another step in the process -- the conference report. And, the House gets to vote one more time. Liberals in the House are watching the Senate proceedings closely. Today, Greg Sargent talked to Reps. Jerry Nadler and Jan Schakowsky, who expressed serious reservations about the evolving Senate bill:

“The House is not going to be dictated to,” Nadler told me.

Both Dems expressed skepticism about the current public option compromise emerging in the Senate, which would create a national plan along the lines of the Federal Employee Health Benefits Plan and would be administered by the Office of Personnel Management.

“It’s important to understand that [the proposal] would be a completely private plan,” Schakowsky said. “Right now, I don’t see it as a good deal.”

Nadler was more blunt: “I don’t know that I would support it.”

There’s little doubt that House Dems will do the lion’s share of compromising in negotiations with the Senate. But House Dems clearly are not prepared to roll over completely. That creates a big challenge for the House Dem leadership, which will have to assemble 218 votes for a bill that could also win 60 in the Senate. All in all, it’s yet another reminder that the road to reform still stretches far into the distance.

The House bill passed with 220 votes -- and just one was a Republican. There's not a lot of wiggle room for the White House. Lose three votes and this thing is over. Greg's report has more salience since Nadler is in the mix. He's tough. And, I keep hearing reports that the relations between the White House and Hill Democrats have gotten frosty. (Apparently, some progressives have had it with being pushed around by their former colleague, Rahm Emanuel.)

Also, there's a vigil for health insurance reform today at the Capitol with Senator Bernie Sanders (D-VT) and Rep. Raul Grijalva. The progressives are making their voices heard. One wonders if anyone is listening. Read the rest of this post...

On Lieberman's ego-driven, faulty position on public option: "No one's called him on anything."

Could it be that the Washington Post has actually acknowledged that Joe Lieberman is basing his opposition to the public option isn't based on any facts -- and that his ego is a factor? Could it be that the D.C.-based media, which venerates Lieberman, is actually cluing in that he's not the saint they believe? One article doesn't mean much, but this is the harshest piece I've seen on Lieberman in the traditional media:

Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (Conn.) has once again inserted himself into the middle of an inflamed partisan debate, raising questions about his motives, his ego and his fickle allegiance to the Democratic Party, which forgave him after he supported Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) for president.

Lieberman, a Democrat-turned-independent who caucuses with his former party, says he is feeling "relevant" as he threatens to withhold his vote -- potentially the decisive 60th -- on health-care reform legislation if it includes a government-run insurance plan. And it is hard to dispute that as Capitol Hill moves farther from the "public option," to the consternation of liberals.

"There is no question he's taken pleasure in this role," said Jacob S. Hacker, a Yale political scientist who helped craft the initial proposal for the public option.

Lieberman has assumed such a central role despite what health-policy experts say have been serial misstatements about reform proposals. But, Hacker laments, "No one's called him on anything."

The "no one" in question includes most reporters and pundits. Read the rest of this post...

TSA leaks its entire airport security manual, a virtual terrorist training manual, posts it on its Web site

Someone shouldn't just be fired. They should be shot for this. From ABC:

In a massive security breach, the Transportation Security Agency (TSA) inadvertently posted online its entire airport screening procedures manual, including some of the most closely guarded secrets regarding special rules for diplomats and CIA and law enforcement officers.

The most sensitive parts of the 93-page Standard Operation Procedures were apparently redacted in a way that computer savvy individuals easily overcame.

The document shows sample CIA, Congressional and law enforcement credentials which experts say would make it easy for terrorists to duplicate.

The improperly redacted areas describe that only 20 percent of checked bags are to be hand searched for explosives and reveals in detail the limitations of x-ray screening machines.

Read the rest of this post...

Safe Drinking Water Act violated and ignored for millions

After watching the Bush administration ignore countless other laws that negatively impacted people and the environment, it's not much of a surprise. As the article says, this is yet another health care issue. The cost of treating Americans for illnesses related to the environment is too often overlooked. NY Times:

That law requires communities to deliver safe tap water to local residents. But since 2004, the water provided to more than 49 million people has contained illegal concentrations of chemicals like arsenic or radioactive substances like uranium, as well as dangerous bacteria often found in sewage.

Regulators were informed of each of those violations as they occurred. But regulatory records show that fewer than 6 percent of the water systems that broke the law were ever fined or punished by state or federal officials, including those at the Environmental Protection Agency, which has ultimate responsibility for enforcing standards.

Studies indicate that drinking water contaminants are linked to millions of instances of illness within the United States each year.

Read the rest of this post...

President Snowe's feelings were hurt

It seems Olympia Snowe was very hurt that Senator Reid didn't let her dictate the terms of the entire health care bill. She is, after all, a member of the minority party that got trounced in the elections the past two years. Why should anyone care what she thinks? Then again, Joe Lieberman isn't a member of any party, and everyone is letting him run the show. Read the rest of this post...

Rockefeller lets Conrad have it over health care reform

Rockefeller, good guy. Conrad, bad guy. Both Dems. From Ryan Grim at Huffington Post:

Rockefeller is leading the push for opening Medicare. When HuffPost told him of Conrad's objections, the West Virginia Democrat let loose.

"That's fine," said Rockefeller. "He probably ties it to everything he talks about. I mean, I'm really very tired of hearing about that from him. And it's always about North Dakota and it's never about any other part of the country. And I thought that, you know, that's what we were trying to do, we were trying to do the best thing for the country."

We are. Others aren't. Read the rest of this post...

Catholic Bishops had sign-off on Senate abortion amendment

The Catholic Bishops really do have a lot more influence in Congress than they do over their parishioners. The Bishops got to approve the abortion amendment being offered today by Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE):

Casey, Nelson and other lawmakers worked closely with the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to come up with language that would meet the church's requirements. In a letter sent to all 100 senators Monday, the bishops endorse the Nelson amendment.

The Nelson amendment is based on language authored by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) and attached to the House-passed healthcare reform bill.

Most American Catholics ignore their bishop. Most Catholics around the world ignore their bishops. Yet, members of Congress kowtow to them. Amazing. Read the rest of this post...

Tuesday Morning Open Thread

Good morning.

The President is delivering a major speech on jobs and the economy today at 11:15 a.m. The speech will be delivered at the Brookings Institute. Also, at 11:00 a.m., the White House Chief Information Officer Vivek Kundra and its Chief Technology Officer Aneesh Chopra will be holding a live chat on the Obama administration's "Open Government Plan." Watch and ask questions here.

Today, the Senate will vote on an anti-choice amendment offered by Conservative Democrat Ben Nelson (NE). It's the Senate equivalent of the Stupak amendment. Nelson needs 60 votes, which is will be hard. But, he's also threatening the entire bill over this provision. We'll see if the Catholic Bishops control the Senate -- and we'll find out if those Bishops will try to kill health care reform if they don't get their way.

The New Jersey Senate's Judiciary Committee passed a marriage equality bill yesterday. The full Senate votes on Thursday. If you live in New Jersey or have family or friends who do, make calls to the Senate using Garden State Equality's website. The haters on the other side are making their calls.

It's primary day for the Senate seat in Massachusetts. Whoever wins the Democratic primary should be elected Senator on January 19, 2010. Contenders include Attorney General Martha Coakley, who has been leading in most polls, Congresman Michael Capuano and City Year Founder Alan Khazei. Turnout will be probably be pretty low.
Let's get threading... Read the rest of this post...

Obama's EPA to step up where Congress won't

This is one of the more encouraging moves by the Obama administration to date. With the loony teabaggers working themselves into a frenzy over science and Big Energy terrified of change, Congress can easily revert back to it's normal, do-nothing existence. Well, do-nothing after the destructive policies were put in place after lobbying influence. (The same do-nothing that helped create this recession, for example.) After eight years of being overrun by business interests, Obama is bringing the EPA back on track. This latest change is a much bolder move than we've become accustomed to with this administration. Is this the start of bolder action across the board?

The move, which coincided with the first day of the international climate summit in Copenhagen, seemed timed to reassure delegates there that the United States is committed to reducing its emissions even if domestic legislation remains bogged down. But it provoked condemnation from key Republicans and from U.S. business groups, which vowed to tie up any regulations in litigation.

In Monday's much-anticipated announcement, the Environmental Protection Agency said that six gases, including carbon dioxide and methane, pose a danger to the environment and the health of Americans and that the agency would start drawing up regulations to reduce those emissions.

Read the rest of this post...

UK pushes for larger cuts at Copenhagen

Whether Gordon Brown will be successful in his attempts to bring more on board remains in doubt. Most of Western Europe is at least discussing the cuts, where the environment is a high priority. As politicians look at the issues that they can positively impact to win voters, the environment is quite high on the list these days. It's not a controversial issue as it is in the US. Most politicians over this way see that the economy is tough ground with limited prospects so they are turning to issues such as this where they can deliver some amount of results. (However feeble they may be.) The Guardian:

The prime minister told the Guardian he hoped the EU would agree to cut its output of greenhouse gases by 30% on 1990 levels by 2020 – a cut 10 percentage points deeper than Europe is currently offering. So far, the EU has said it will cut by 30% only if an ambitious global deal is reached.

Brown said: "We've got to make countries recognise that they have to be as ambitious as they say they want to be. It's not enough to say 'I may do this, I might do this, possibly I'll do this'. I want to create a situation in which the European Union is persuaded to go to 30%."

Any move to increase Europe's emissions reduction target would be fiercely resisted by eastern European countries as well as Italy and Austria, who have opposed deeper cuts.

Read the rest of this post...

A nice sunset the other day in Chicago

I don't know why Chicago tends to get these kind of sunsets in the winter - the ones with the long horizontal bands. Perhaps they happen everywhere, but I don't notice them quite exactly like this, except in Chicago during the fall and winter. I remember as kids, the teacher in 3rd or 4th grade, or so, had us do a watercolor of this very scene - trees with the bands of sunset behind it. I still have the picture, and have been meaning to frame it one of these days. Read the rest of this post...