Senator Mccain sells over 368,000 American jobs a year to a combination of immigrants, foreign guest workers,
Reminder - Hold Your Senators Accountable for Rejecting Byrd Amendment to Stop Major Foreign Worker/Immigration Increase
Remember to hold your senators accountable this week for their vote on Sen. Robert Byrd's (D-WV) amendment to strip the massive foreign worker/immigration increase from the Deficit Reduction bill. Sen. Byrd's amendment was rejected last Thursday by a 14-85 vote.
Click here to see how your senators voted, then call their offices to voice your approval or disapproval of their vote. Remember, a vote against the Byrd amendment is a vote for increasing immigration and displacing American workers with foreign labor.
(Call the Capitol Switchboard (202-224-3121) and ask to be connected or find your senators phone numbers here on our web site.)
Background:
Sen. Byrd's amendment would have replaced the Specter/Kennedy language which sells over 368,000 American jobs a year to a combination of immigrants, foreign guest workers, and their families, with the House Judiciary Committee proposal to raise fees on L-1 intra-company transferee visas. Byrd's amendment would have achieved the required savings without making wholesale changes to our immigration system.
Tuesday, November 08, 2005
Friday, November 04, 2005
Senate Sells Out American Workers:
Senate Sells Out American Workers: Rejects Byrd Amendment to Stop Major Foreign Worker/Immigration Increase
Thanks for making calls this week in support of Sen. Robert Byrd's (D-WV) amendment to strip the massive foreign worker/immigration increase from the Deficit Reduction bill. We received feedback that phones were ringing off the hook in Senate offices. I'm sorry to report that the Senate chose to sell out American workers yesterday, and rejected the Byrd amendment by a 14-85 vote.
FOLLOW THIS LINK TO FIND OUT HOW YOUR SENATORS VOTED
Sen. Byrd's amendment would have replaced the Specter/Kennedy language which sells over 368,000 American jobs a year to a combination of immigrants, foreign guest workers, and their families, with the House Judiciary Committee proposal to raise fees on L-1 intra-company transferee visas. Byrd's amendment would have achieved the required savings without making wholesale changes to our immigration system.
This vote clearly demonstrates that the Senate is willing to pass major immigration and guest worker expansions without proper debate under the guise of reducing the deficit.
After voting down the Byrd amendment, the Senate approved the Deficit Reduction Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 2005 (S. 1932) by a 52-47 vote.
We will continue to fight this foreign worker/immigration increase as the reconciliation process moves towards the House/Senate conference stage.
HOLD YOUR SENATORS ACCOUNTABLE!
For now, take this vote as an opportunity to hold your senators accountable. Find out how they voted, then call their offices to voice your approval or disapproval of their vote. Remember, a vote against the Byrd amendment is a vote for increasing immigration and displacing American workers with foreign labor.
Call the Capitol Switchboard (202-224-3121) and ask to be connected or find your senators phone numbers here on our web site.
BACKGROUND:
Last week, without a public hearing or even a warning, the Senate Judiciary Committee inserted language authored by Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA) that increases revenue by selling over 368,000 American jobs a year to foreign workers and their families who will enter the United States and stay permanently.
The Specter/Kennedy language would increase the number of H-1B workers by 30,000 each year, increase the number of permanent employment-based visas by 90,000 each year, and exempt families of these new workers from the 140,000 annual cap on employment-based immigration. This will add an estimated 278,000 family members - many of them will also find jobs in the United States - to the number of high tech and permanent new foreign workers allowed under the plan. If enacted, the Specter plan would constitute one of the largest immigration increases in American history under the guise of deficit reduction.
The Committee was charged with finding $60 million in FY 06 and $300 million over the period between FY 20006 and FY 2010. The Specter/Kennedy language raises fees on H-1B and permanent employment-based visas charged to employers to accomplish savings. Sen. Byrd's amendment would have striped out the Specter/Kennedy language and replaced it with the House Judiciary Committee proposal to raise the fees on L-1 intra-company transferees to $1,500 per visa. Sen. Byrd's amendment would have provided the required savings without making wholesale changes to our immigration system.
Thanks for making calls this week in support of Sen. Robert Byrd's (D-WV) amendment to strip the massive foreign worker/immigration increase from the Deficit Reduction bill. We received feedback that phones were ringing off the hook in Senate offices. I'm sorry to report that the Senate chose to sell out American workers yesterday, and rejected the Byrd amendment by a 14-85 vote.
FOLLOW THIS LINK TO FIND OUT HOW YOUR SENATORS VOTED
Sen. Byrd's amendment would have replaced the Specter/Kennedy language which sells over 368,000 American jobs a year to a combination of immigrants, foreign guest workers, and their families, with the House Judiciary Committee proposal to raise fees on L-1 intra-company transferee visas. Byrd's amendment would have achieved the required savings without making wholesale changes to our immigration system.
This vote clearly demonstrates that the Senate is willing to pass major immigration and guest worker expansions without proper debate under the guise of reducing the deficit.
After voting down the Byrd amendment, the Senate approved the Deficit Reduction Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 2005 (S. 1932) by a 52-47 vote.
We will continue to fight this foreign worker/immigration increase as the reconciliation process moves towards the House/Senate conference stage.
HOLD YOUR SENATORS ACCOUNTABLE!
For now, take this vote as an opportunity to hold your senators accountable. Find out how they voted, then call their offices to voice your approval or disapproval of their vote. Remember, a vote against the Byrd amendment is a vote for increasing immigration and displacing American workers with foreign labor.
Call the Capitol Switchboard (202-224-3121) and ask to be connected or find your senators phone numbers here on our web site.
BACKGROUND:
Last week, without a public hearing or even a warning, the Senate Judiciary Committee inserted language authored by Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA) that increases revenue by selling over 368,000 American jobs a year to foreign workers and their families who will enter the United States and stay permanently.
The Specter/Kennedy language would increase the number of H-1B workers by 30,000 each year, increase the number of permanent employment-based visas by 90,000 each year, and exempt families of these new workers from the 140,000 annual cap on employment-based immigration. This will add an estimated 278,000 family members - many of them will also find jobs in the United States - to the number of high tech and permanent new foreign workers allowed under the plan. If enacted, the Specter plan would constitute one of the largest immigration increases in American history under the guise of deficit reduction.
The Committee was charged with finding $60 million in FY 06 and $300 million over the period between FY 20006 and FY 2010. The Specter/Kennedy language raises fees on H-1B and permanent employment-based visas charged to employers to accomplish savings. Sen. Byrd's amendment would have striped out the Specter/Kennedy language and replaced it with the House Judiciary Committee proposal to raise the fees on L-1 intra-company transferees to $1,500 per visa. Sen. Byrd's amendment would have provided the required savings without making wholesale changes to our immigration system.
Thursday, November 03, 2005
another cronie ? Julie Myers declined to discuss her plan to address problems what the shit ?
another cronie ? Julie Myers declined to discuss her plan to address problems what the shit ?
If Julie Myers is confirmed as expected as director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement at the Homeland Security Department, one of her top priorities and major challenges will be repairing the agency’s financial integrity.
Federal auditors have singled out the agency’s financial management problems as particularly troublesome in the last year.
Myers told senators at her Sept. 15 nomination hearing that fixing ICE’s financial management will be paramount among her concerns. Myers said the problem stretches back to ICE’s creation in March 2003, when it was cobbled together from remnants of the Immigration and Naturalization Service and Customs Service. She said ICE was shortchanged in those early days of Homeland Security.
Homeland Security’s current and former inspectors general told lawmakers in July that ICE’s effort to provide accounting and other services to other department agencies during that time contributed to its budget shortfall. ICE and its customer bureaus did not agree on what ICE would provide and how much it would charge until late fiscal 2004, former IG Clark Kent Ervin said in a written statement to the House Government Reform subcommittee on government management, finance and accountability. By that point, ICE was left with a shortfall of between $200 million and $300 million, Ervin said.
Since then, Myers said, Congress ensured ICE received necessary funding, but the effects of that initial underfunding are still being felt.
The budget problems prompted a year-long hiring freeze that began in fall 2004, and some agents were forced to pay for their own gas and did not have enough money to pay confidential informants or use cell phones, Ervin said. ICE’s already-underfunded efforts to house arrested illegal aliens awaiting deportation also suffered further, he said.
Also, experienced financial staff began bolting in the summer of 2003 some to other Homeland Security bureaus delivering another blow to the agency’s financial management, Inspector General Richard Skinner said.
By fiscal 2004, ICE had fallen far behind in its basic accounting functions, Skinner said, such as balancing checkbooks and resolving bookkeeping anomalies.
Skinner said ICE’s accounting records were so bad that independent auditors could not tell whether the agency had broken federal law by spending more than it was budgeted.
ICE’s difficulties have affected the entire department by consuming large amounts of management time that could have gone to helping other agencies, Skinner said.
Myers on Sept. 15 pledged to get the agency’s financial house in order. But a major hurdle is that the agency still lacks enough financial managers, Myers said. She told senators one of her first tasks will be to hire a permanent chief financial officer.
Myers declined to discuss her plan to address the agency’s financial problems until after she is confirmed. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee approved her nomination in an Oct. 7 party-line vote; it now awaits a Senate vote.
Myers, now President Bush’s special assistant for personnel, was an assistant U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York, a deputy assistant secretary of the Treasury Department in charge of investigating money laundering and financial crimes, an assistant secretary of Commerce for export enforcement, and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff’s chief of staff when he was the Justice Department’s assistant attorney general.
Several senators from both parties, including Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, expressed concerns during Myers’ nomination hearing about her lack of experience with immigration issues. Running ICE, which has a $4 billion budget and more than 14,000 employees, is a vast step up from her Commerce position, where she oversaw 170 employees and a $25 million budget. Her tenure at Commerce was the largest management job she noted in written responses to Senate questions.
Republican senators’ subsequent conversations with Chertoff and Myers alleviated their concerns, and Myers’ nomination was passed out of committee. Before the committee approved Myers, Democrats such as Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut restated their misgivings.
Experts contacted by Federal Times said Myers is right to make improving finances a priority.
Former IG Ervin said that financial management problems will plague the agency until it can staff itself with enough qualified accountants and financial managers.
By STEPHEN LOSEY see more at ..........
http://federaltimes.com/index2.php?S=1212903
If Julie Myers is confirmed as expected as director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement at the Homeland Security Department, one of her top priorities and major challenges will be repairing the agency’s financial integrity.
Federal auditors have singled out the agency’s financial management problems as particularly troublesome in the last year.
Myers told senators at her Sept. 15 nomination hearing that fixing ICE’s financial management will be paramount among her concerns. Myers said the problem stretches back to ICE’s creation in March 2003, when it was cobbled together from remnants of the Immigration and Naturalization Service and Customs Service. She said ICE was shortchanged in those early days of Homeland Security.
Homeland Security’s current and former inspectors general told lawmakers in July that ICE’s effort to provide accounting and other services to other department agencies during that time contributed to its budget shortfall. ICE and its customer bureaus did not agree on what ICE would provide and how much it would charge until late fiscal 2004, former IG Clark Kent Ervin said in a written statement to the House Government Reform subcommittee on government management, finance and accountability. By that point, ICE was left with a shortfall of between $200 million and $300 million, Ervin said.
Since then, Myers said, Congress ensured ICE received necessary funding, but the effects of that initial underfunding are still being felt.
The budget problems prompted a year-long hiring freeze that began in fall 2004, and some agents were forced to pay for their own gas and did not have enough money to pay confidential informants or use cell phones, Ervin said. ICE’s already-underfunded efforts to house arrested illegal aliens awaiting deportation also suffered further, he said.
Also, experienced financial staff began bolting in the summer of 2003 some to other Homeland Security bureaus delivering another blow to the agency’s financial management, Inspector General Richard Skinner said.
By fiscal 2004, ICE had fallen far behind in its basic accounting functions, Skinner said, such as balancing checkbooks and resolving bookkeeping anomalies.
Skinner said ICE’s accounting records were so bad that independent auditors could not tell whether the agency had broken federal law by spending more than it was budgeted.
ICE’s difficulties have affected the entire department by consuming large amounts of management time that could have gone to helping other agencies, Skinner said.
Myers on Sept. 15 pledged to get the agency’s financial house in order. But a major hurdle is that the agency still lacks enough financial managers, Myers said. She told senators one of her first tasks will be to hire a permanent chief financial officer.
Myers declined to discuss her plan to address the agency’s financial problems until after she is confirmed. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee approved her nomination in an Oct. 7 party-line vote; it now awaits a Senate vote.
Myers, now President Bush’s special assistant for personnel, was an assistant U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York, a deputy assistant secretary of the Treasury Department in charge of investigating money laundering and financial crimes, an assistant secretary of Commerce for export enforcement, and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff’s chief of staff when he was the Justice Department’s assistant attorney general.
Several senators from both parties, including Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, expressed concerns during Myers’ nomination hearing about her lack of experience with immigration issues. Running ICE, which has a $4 billion budget and more than 14,000 employees, is a vast step up from her Commerce position, where she oversaw 170 employees and a $25 million budget. Her tenure at Commerce was the largest management job she noted in written responses to Senate questions.
Republican senators’ subsequent conversations with Chertoff and Myers alleviated their concerns, and Myers’ nomination was passed out of committee. Before the committee approved Myers, Democrats such as Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut restated their misgivings.
Experts contacted by Federal Times said Myers is right to make improving finances a priority.
Former IG Ervin said that financial management problems will plague the agency until it can staff itself with enough qualified accountants and financial managers.
By STEPHEN LOSEY see more at ..........
http://federaltimes.com/index2.php?S=1212903
Sunday, October 30, 2005
FS: John Mccain home for $4.25 million
PHOENIX Arizona Senator John McCain is putting his central Phoenix estate up for sale.
The Republican's 11-thousand-square-foot home near
Glendale and Central avenues is being listed for 4-point-25
(m) million dollars.
McCain's wife Cindy, who is the daughter of
liquor-distribution magnate Jim Hensley, grew up in the mansion. The home
has since been expanded and renovated.
The gated estate sits on two acres. It has a large guesthouse, nine bedrooms, eight bathrooms and plenty of security cameras.
Realtor Bobby Lieb of Realty Executives has been hired to sell the home. He says the land alone is worth two (m) million dollars.
A spokeswoman in McCain's Washington D-C office says the senator and his wife want to downsize now that only the youngest of their four children is living at home.
Their casual, Southwestern-style house was featured
in the July issue of Architectural Digest.
see more at............
http://kvoa.com/Global/story.asp?S=4047625&nav=HMO6
The Republican's 11-thousand-square-foot home near
Glendale and Central avenues is being listed for 4-point-25
(m) million dollars.
McCain's wife Cindy, who is the daughter of
liquor-distribution magnate Jim Hensley, grew up in the mansion. The home
has since been expanded and renovated.
The gated estate sits on two acres. It has a large guesthouse, nine bedrooms, eight bathrooms and plenty of security cameras.
Realtor Bobby Lieb of Realty Executives has been hired to sell the home. He says the land alone is worth two (m) million dollars.
A spokeswoman in McCain's Washington D-C office says the senator and his wife want to downsize now that only the youngest of their four children is living at home.
Their casual, Southwestern-style house was featured
in the July issue of Architectural Digest.
see more at............
http://kvoa.com/Global/story.asp?S=4047625&nav=HMO6
Wednesday, October 19, 2005
Rush rejects Senator Mccain
Rush Limbaugh Recommends Virginia Senator George Allen As 2008 Republican Nominee
Local: Wed, Oct 19 2005 7:46 am
Subject: Rush Limbaugh Recommends Virginia Senator George Allen As 2008 Republican Nominee
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
Last night on the Fox TV Sean Hannity show conservative talk-radio host
Rush Limbaugh advised that the Republicans reject moderates like John
McCain and Rudy Giuliano and nominate a right-wing candidate like
current Virginia Republican senator George Allan for president in 2008.
Limbaugh said that there in now a state of war between the Left and
Right in the U.S. and there is no possibility of compromise. The base of
the Democratic Left is radical, hate- America and its middle-class
capitalist republic.
Limbaugh stated that the Republicans best chance for political victory
is reaming well to the right like Ronald Regan and not try to appease
the Left in any way. This has been the mistake of George Bush, primarily
in his second term, of believing that there can be some kind of
compromise, that he could win some "liberals" over by granting
concessions. Bush tried that with disastrous results e.g. in allowing
Ted Kennedy to write his education policy, "Leave No Child Behind".
Limbaugh mentioned that talk radio which he more or less initiated back
in 1988 has been a decisive force in the rejuvenation of
U.S.conservatism, whose revolution actually began back in the 1960s
with William F. Buckley, National Review and Barry Goldwater. Now the
charge is being led by talk radio and Fox News for the battle of the
hearts and minds of the American people.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.republican/browse_thread/thread/c47357b06e978575/7bc724ae79e1a320?q=senator+john+mccain&rnum=2#7bc724ae79e1a320
Local: Wed, Oct 19 2005 7:46 am
Subject: Rush Limbaugh Recommends Virginia Senator George Allen As 2008 Republican Nominee
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
Last night on the Fox TV Sean Hannity show conservative talk-radio host
Rush Limbaugh advised that the Republicans reject moderates like John
McCain and Rudy Giuliano and nominate a right-wing candidate like
current Virginia Republican senator George Allan for president in 2008.
Limbaugh said that there in now a state of war between the Left and
Right in the U.S. and there is no possibility of compromise. The base of
the Democratic Left is radical, hate- America and its middle-class
capitalist republic.
Limbaugh stated that the Republicans best chance for political victory
is reaming well to the right like Ronald Regan and not try to appease
the Left in any way. This has been the mistake of George Bush, primarily
in his second term, of believing that there can be some kind of
compromise, that he could win some "liberals" over by granting
concessions. Bush tried that with disastrous results e.g. in allowing
Ted Kennedy to write his education policy, "Leave No Child Behind".
Limbaugh mentioned that talk radio which he more or less initiated back
in 1988 has been a decisive force in the rejuvenation of
U.S.conservatism, whose revolution actually began back in the 1960s
with William F. Buckley, National Review and Barry Goldwater. Now the
charge is being led by talk radio and Fox News for the battle of the
hearts and minds of the American people.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.republican/browse_thread/thread/c47357b06e978575/7bc724ae79e1a320?q=senator+john+mccain&rnum=2#7bc724ae79e1a320
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
Senator Conrad Hits DeLay in Indian Affairs Hearings
Senator Conrad Hits DeLay in Indian Affairs Hearings
All 2 messages in topic - view as tree
Obwon Oct 18, 3:17 pm show options
Newsgroups: nyc.politics, alt.politics.democrats, nj.politics, ca.politics, alt.politics.clinton
From: Obwon - Find messages by this author
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 19:17:39 GMT
Local: Tues, Oct 18 2005 3:17 pm
Subject: Senator Conrad Hits DeLay in Indian Affairs Hearings
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
Executive Intelligence Review
This article appears in the October 8, 2004 issue of
Executive Intelligence Review.
Senator Conrad Hits DeLay in Indian
Affairs Hearings on Abramoff Looting
by Anton Chaitkin
The Senate Indian Affairs Committee stunned a public
hearing by revealing that recent newspaper coverage had
inaccurately understated what the committee identified
as over $66 million in payments and millions more in
political donations, extracted from six Indian tribes
by casino lobbyist Jack Abramoff and his secret junior
partner Michael Scanlon. The partners shared millions
of this loot with former Christian Coalition executive
director Ralph Reed, Abramoff's protégé and currently
Southeast USA director of the Bush-Cheney election
campaign, who has used the Christian Coalition to carry
out the Abramoff/Scanlon schemes.
Tension in the Sept. 29 hearings was high, as the
stakes are high.
The role of Abramoff, Scanlon, and Reed, in creating
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's Congress-dominating
machine, overshadowed the hearings. North Dakota
Democrat Sen. Kent Conrad repeatedly brought out the
fact that the looters had made their access to DeLay
their selling point for getting lobbying contracts with
the casino-owning tribes.
Arizona Republican John McCain, who himself has been
attacked for pushing these hearings, intervened, in an
effort to take the spotlight off DeLay and the
Republicans. McCain Grover Norquist, whose Americans
for Tax Reform got $25,000 from the Abramoff Indian
loot, has accused McCain of pushing the hearings to get
back at Bush partisans for opposing McCain for the 2000
Republican Presidential nomination, and McCain may have
been covering himself within the Republican Party as
the election approaches.
In the Senators' opening remarks, the perpetrators'
leaked e-mails were read and displayed for the hearing,
as were Abramoff's references to the tribal leaders
whom he was ripping off, as "monkeys" and other racist
epithets.
Senator Conrad began in the preliminary statements to
highlight the schemes in DeLay's Texas, by Abramoff,
Scanlon, and Reed. McCain asked Conrad to move along,
not to dwell on this side of things.
Committee Chairman Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell
(R-Colo.)—himself a chief of the Northern Cheyenne
tribe—announced that Mike Scanlon is dodging subpoenas
and resisting the committee's request to appear before
them. Senator Campbell emphasized that either Scanlon
would come voluntarily or would be escorted in by
Federal marshals.
Jack Abramoff appeared and invoked his Constitutional
right not to testify.
Senator Campbell, in his unanswered questions to
Abramoff, said that Jewish people had long been the
victims of such bigotry as Abramoff showed in his
contemptuous e-mails about his clients, so Campbell was
surprised to hear this coming from Abramoff. Abramoff
presents himself as an Orthodox Jew, and is Tom DeLay's
intermediary with the Israeli political forces around
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his Likud party.
Senator Conrad hit Abramoff with questions centering on
his schemes with Ralph Reed and the Christian
Coalition. Senator McCain twice asked Conrad to stop
asking these questions, since Abramoff was not
answering, suggesting that it was "badgering" the
witness.
All 2 messages in topic - view as tree
Obwon Oct 18, 3:17 pm show options
Newsgroups: nyc.politics, alt.politics.democrats, nj.politics, ca.politics, alt.politics.clinton
From: Obwon
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 19:17:39 GMT
Local: Tues, Oct 18 2005 3:17 pm
Subject: Senator Conrad Hits DeLay in Indian Affairs Hearings
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse
Executive Intelligence Review
This article appears in the October 8, 2004 issue of
Executive Intelligence Review.
Senator Conrad Hits DeLay in Indian
Affairs Hearings on Abramoff Looting
by Anton Chaitkin
The Senate Indian Affairs Committee stunned a public
hearing by revealing that recent newspaper coverage had
inaccurately understated what the committee identified
as over $66 million in payments and millions more in
political donations, extracted from six Indian tribes
by casino lobbyist Jack Abramoff and his secret junior
partner Michael Scanlon. The partners shared millions
of this loot with former Christian Coalition executive
director Ralph Reed, Abramoff's protégé and currently
Southeast USA director of the Bush-Cheney election
campaign, who has used the Christian Coalition to carry
out the Abramoff/Scanlon schemes.
Tension in the Sept. 29 hearings was high, as the
stakes are high.
The role of Abramoff, Scanlon, and Reed, in creating
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's Congress-dominating
machine, overshadowed the hearings. North Dakota
Democrat Sen. Kent Conrad repeatedly brought out the
fact that the looters had made their access to DeLay
their selling point for getting lobbying contracts with
the casino-owning tribes.
Arizona Republican John McCain, who himself has been
attacked for pushing these hearings, intervened, in an
effort to take the spotlight off DeLay and the
Republicans. McCain Grover Norquist, whose Americans
for Tax Reform got $25,000 from the Abramoff Indian
loot, has accused McCain of pushing the hearings to get
back at Bush partisans for opposing McCain for the 2000
Republican Presidential nomination, and McCain may have
been covering himself within the Republican Party as
the election approaches.
In the Senators' opening remarks, the perpetrators'
leaked e-mails were read and displayed for the hearing,
as were Abramoff's references to the tribal leaders
whom he was ripping off, as "monkeys" and other racist
epithets.
Senator Conrad began in the preliminary statements to
highlight the schemes in DeLay's Texas, by Abramoff,
Scanlon, and Reed. McCain asked Conrad to move along,
not to dwell on this side of things.
Committee Chairman Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell
(R-Colo.)—himself a chief of the Northern Cheyenne
tribe—announced that Mike Scanlon is dodging subpoenas
and resisting the committee's request to appear before
them. Senator Campbell emphasized that either Scanlon
would come voluntarily or would be escorted in by
Federal marshals.
Jack Abramoff appeared and invoked his Constitutional
right not to testify.
Senator Campbell, in his unanswered questions to
Abramoff, said that Jewish people had long been the
victims of such bigotry as Abramoff showed in his
contemptuous e-mails about his clients, so Campbell was
surprised to hear this coming from Abramoff. Abramoff
presents himself as an Orthodox Jew, and is Tom DeLay's
intermediary with the Israeli political forces around
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his Likud party.
Senator Conrad hit Abramoff with questions centering on
his schemes with Ralph Reed and the Christian
Coalition. Senator McCain twice asked Conrad to stop
asking these questions, since Abramoff was not
answering, suggesting that it was "badgering" the
witness.
Thursday, October 13, 2005
The blogosphere burns the witch (?) Julie Myers
The blogosphere burns the witch (?) Julie Myers
By: smagar · Section: Diaries
Remember the stories about how sharks, once they taste blood, go into a feeding frenzy and devour anything in their path?
This latest hit piece by Michelle Malkin leads me to wonder if Michelle has tasted blood, and likes it a bit too much.
More to the point, I wonder if the conservative blogosphere is too eagerly joining into feeding frenzies, such as the outrage over Julie Myers and Michael Brown. Or, to use another analogy, too willing to tie people to stakes and burn them as witches.
We may be too willingly eschewing minor but useful details in the process. Such as, oh, determining if they actually are witches BEFORE we burn them!
Or, in the case of Ms. Myers, showing an interest in exhibiting fair play and a sense of "due process" in what we say on these blogs.
I suspect I'll be in the minority here, but I feel that Ms. Malkin, the chattering crew at National Review Online, and other strident voices in the conservative blogosphere heard of Ms. Myers, decided that she be a witch, and tied her to the stake and burned her with no interest in a trial. Or, letting her defend herself and her reputation.
Is THAT the Modus Operandi we want the conservative blogosphere to adopt? Is THAT the reputation we want the conservative blogosphere to earn for itself, as it grows into a more potent force in American political discouse?
For myself, I hope not.
As for Michael Brown, the deposed FEMA head, follow this link for what I wrote a while back on how I feel Mike Brown was treated. IMO, too many people (e.g., Michelle Malkin and the NRO crew) were willing to burn Brown at the stake and scapegoat him for the NO shortcomings, before we had a chance to learn what really happened. That's all I'll say in this diary about Brown.
As for Julie Myers, here's what the Washington Post had to say about her on Tuesday, September 20th:
The Bush administration is seeking to appoint a lawyer with little immigration or customs experience to head the troubled law enforcement agency that handles those issues, prompting sharp criticism from some employee groups, immigration advocates and homeland security experts.
The push to appoint Julie Myers to head the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, part of the Department of Homeland Security, comes in the midst of intense debate over the qualifications of department political appointees involved in the sluggish response to Hurricane Katrina.
And, that same day, at 0645 Eastern Standard Time, Michelle Malkin was off to the races. Here are a few of her assessments of Ms. Myers as a potential civil servant:
NO MORE CRONYISM: BUSH DHS NOMINEE DOESN'T DESERVE THE JOB
Another disastrous crony appointment in the making
This is Julie Myers, President Bush's nominee to head the the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency under the Department of Homeland Security.
Her nomination is a joke. A bad joke:
Erin Healy, a White House spokeswoman, cited Myers's work with customs agents on money-laundering and drug-smuggling cases. "She's well-known and respected throughout the law enforcement community," Healy said. "She has a proven track record as an effective manager."
Oh, give me a ^*&%$# break and a half! This nomination is a monumental political and policy blunder in the wake of the Michael Brown/FEMA fiasco.
see more at ........
http://smagar.redstate.org/story/2005/9/24/112515/657
By: smagar · Section: Diaries
Remember the stories about how sharks, once they taste blood, go into a feeding frenzy and devour anything in their path?
This latest hit piece by Michelle Malkin leads me to wonder if Michelle has tasted blood, and likes it a bit too much.
More to the point, I wonder if the conservative blogosphere is too eagerly joining into feeding frenzies, such as the outrage over Julie Myers and Michael Brown. Or, to use another analogy, too willing to tie people to stakes and burn them as witches.
We may be too willingly eschewing minor but useful details in the process. Such as, oh, determining if they actually are witches BEFORE we burn them!
Or, in the case of Ms. Myers, showing an interest in exhibiting fair play and a sense of "due process" in what we say on these blogs.
I suspect I'll be in the minority here, but I feel that Ms. Malkin, the chattering crew at National Review Online, and other strident voices in the conservative blogosphere heard of Ms. Myers, decided that she be a witch, and tied her to the stake and burned her with no interest in a trial. Or, letting her defend herself and her reputation.
Is THAT the Modus Operandi we want the conservative blogosphere to adopt? Is THAT the reputation we want the conservative blogosphere to earn for itself, as it grows into a more potent force in American political discouse?
For myself, I hope not.
As for Michael Brown, the deposed FEMA head, follow this link for what I wrote a while back on how I feel Mike Brown was treated. IMO, too many people (e.g., Michelle Malkin and the NRO crew) were willing to burn Brown at the stake and scapegoat him for the NO shortcomings, before we had a chance to learn what really happened. That's all I'll say in this diary about Brown.
As for Julie Myers, here's what the Washington Post had to say about her on Tuesday, September 20th:
The Bush administration is seeking to appoint a lawyer with little immigration or customs experience to head the troubled law enforcement agency that handles those issues, prompting sharp criticism from some employee groups, immigration advocates and homeland security experts.
The push to appoint Julie Myers to head the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, part of the Department of Homeland Security, comes in the midst of intense debate over the qualifications of department political appointees involved in the sluggish response to Hurricane Katrina.
And, that same day, at 0645 Eastern Standard Time, Michelle Malkin was off to the races. Here are a few of her assessments of Ms. Myers as a potential civil servant:
NO MORE CRONYISM: BUSH DHS NOMINEE DOESN'T DESERVE THE JOB
Another disastrous crony appointment in the making
This is Julie Myers, President Bush's nominee to head the the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency under the Department of Homeland Security.
Her nomination is a joke. A bad joke:
Erin Healy, a White House spokeswoman, cited Myers's work with customs agents on money-laundering and drug-smuggling cases. "She's well-known and respected throughout the law enforcement community," Healy said. "She has a proven track record as an effective manager."
Oh, give me a ^*&%$# break and a half! This nomination is a monumental political and policy blunder in the wake of the Michael Brown/FEMA fiasco.
see more at ........
http://smagar.redstate.org/story/2005/9/24/112515/657
Monday, October 10, 2005
John McCain to delay decision on '08 run until '06
John McCain to delay decision on '08 run until '06
NEW YORK Senator John McCain is considering a
2008 run for president, but he says he's unlikely
to run for the Number Two spot.
He tells the New York Daily News yesterday that he
is seriously considering a 2008 bid. However,
McCain says he'll wait until after the 2006 election
to decide about his political future.
McCain, who ran for president in 2000,
was re-elected to a six-year Senate term in 2004.
see more at kvoa.com
http://kvoa.com/Global/story.asp?S=3958305&nav=HMO6
NEW YORK Senator John McCain is considering a
2008 run for president, but he says he's unlikely
to run for the Number Two spot.
He tells the New York Daily News yesterday that he
is seriously considering a 2008 bid. However,
McCain says he'll wait until after the 2006 election
to decide about his political future.
McCain, who ran for president in 2000,
was re-elected to a six-year Senate term in 2004.
see more at kvoa.com
http://kvoa.com/Global/story.asp?S=3958305&nav=HMO6
Senator Jon Kyl formally announces his bid for re-election
Senator Jon Kyl formally announces his bid for re-election
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
In Tucson at 8:00 a.m.
Pima Air and Space Museum
6000 East Valencia
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
In Tucson at 8:00 a.m.
Pima Air and Space Museum
6000 East Valencia
Sunday, October 09, 2005
MCCAIN STATEMENT ON DETAINEE AMENDMENTS
MCCAIN STATEMENT ON DETAINEE AMENDMENTS
For Immediate Release
Wednesday, Oct 05, 2005
Washington D.C. ¬– Senator McCain delivered the following statement today from the Senate floor on the Amendment on (1) the Army Field Manual and (2) Cruel, Inhumane, Degrading Treatment, amendment #1977:
Mr. President, I call up amendment #1977, which is filed at the desk.
The Department of Defense Appropriations bill is one of the most important funding measures considered by Congress. Equally important is the Department of Defense Authorization bill, and it is very unfortunate that we are forced to consider this funding measure without having completed our important work on the authorization bill. Despite the efforts of the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Armed Services Committee, who have worked to bring up and dispense with the authorization bill in a reasonable manner, they have been unable to reach an agreement with the leadership. As a result, the authorizers have filed the authorization bill and a procedural vote will occur on it this evening.
The Senate has an obligation to address the authorizing legislation, just as it has an obligation to deal with the issue that apparently led to the bill being pulled from the floor – America’s treatment of its detainees. Several weeks ago I received a letter from Captain Ian Fishback, a member of the 82nd Airborne Division at Fort Bragg, and a veteran of combat in Afghanistan and Iraq. Over 17 months he struggled to get answers from his chain of command to a basic question: what standards apply to the treatment of enemy detainees? But he found no answers. In his remarkable letter, he pleads with Congress, asking us to take action, to establish standards, to clear up the confusion – not for the good of the terrorists, but for the good of our soldiers and our country. The Captain closes his letter by saying, “I strongly urge you to do justice to your men and women in uniform. Give them clear standards of conduct that reflect the ideals they risk their lives for.” I believe that the Congress has a responsibility to answer this call – a call that has come not just from this one brave soldier but from so many of our men and women in uniform.
We owe it to them, Mr. President. We sent them to fight for us in Afghanistan and Iraq. We placed extraordinary pressure on them to extract intelligence from detainees. But then we threw out the rules that our soldiers had trained on, and replaced them with a confusing and constantly changing array of standards. We demanded intelligence without ever clearly telling our troops what was permitted and what was forbidden. And then when things went wrong, we blamed them and we punished them. We have to do better than that.
I can understand why some administration lawyers might want ambiguity, so that every hypothetical option is theoretically open, even those the President has said he does not want to exercise. But war does not occur in theory, and our troops are not served by ambiguity. They are crying out for clarity. The Congress cannot shrink from this duty, we cannot hide our heads, pulling bills from the floor and avoiding votes. We owe it to our soldiers, during this time of war, to take a stand.
And so while I would prefer to offer this amendment to the DOD Authorization bill, I am left with no choice but to offer it to this appropriations measure. I would note that I am offering this amendment in accordance with the options afforded under Rule 16 of the Standing Rules of the Senate. The amendment I will now offer combines the two amendments that I previously filed to the authorizing measure.
This amendment would (1) establish the Army Field Manual as the uniform standard for the interrogation of Department of Defense detainees and (2) prohibit cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment of persons in the detention of the U.S. government.
Mr. President, to fight terrorism we need intelligence. That much is obvious. What should also be obvious is that the intelligence we collect must be reliable and acquired humanely, under clear standards understood by all our fighting men and women. To do differently would not only offend our values as Americans, but undermine our war effort, because abuse of prisoners harms – not helps – us in the war on terror. First, subjecting prisoners to abuse leads to bad intelligence, because under torture a detainee will tell his interrogator anything to make the pain stop. Second, mistreatment of our prisoners endangers U.S. troops who might be captured by the enemy – if not in this war, then in the next. And third, prisoner abuses exact on us a terrible toll in the war of ideas, because inevitably these abuses become public. When they do, the cruel actions of a few darken the reputation of our country in the eyes of millions. American values should win against all others in any war of ideas, and we can’t let prisoner abuse tarnish our image.
And yet reports of detainee abuse continue to emerge, in large part, I believe, because of confusion in the field as to what is permitted and what is not. The amendment I am proposing will go a long way toward clearing up this confusion.
Army Field Manual
The first part of this amendment would establish the Army Field Manual as the uniform standard for the interrogation of Department of Defense detainees. The Army Field Manual and its various editions have served America well, through wars against both regular and irregular foes. It embodies the values Americans have embraced for generations, while preserving the ability of our interrogators to extract critical intelligence from ruthless foes. Never has this been more important than today, in the midst of the war on terror.
The Army Field Manual authorizes interrogation techniques that have proven effective in extracting life-saving information from the most hardened enemy prisoners. It is consistent with our laws and, most importantly, our values. Let us not forget that al-Qaeda sought not just to destroy American lives on September 11, but American values – our way of life and all we cherish. We fight not just to preserve our lives and liberties but also American values, and we will never allow the terrorists to take those away. In this war that we must win - that we will win - we must never simply fight evil with evil.
This amendment would establish the Army Field Manual as the standard for interrogation of all detainees held in DOD custody. The Manual has been developed by the Executive Branch for its own uses, and a new edition, written to take into account the needs of the war on terror and with a new classified annex, is due to be issued soon. My amendment would not set the Field Manual in stone – it could be changed at any time.
The advantage of setting a standard for interrogation based on the Field Manual is to cut down on the significant level of confusion that still exists with respect to which interrogation techniques are allowed. The Armed Services Committee has held hearings with a slew of high-level Defense Department officials, from regional commanders, to judge advocate generals, to the Department’s deputy general counsel. A chief topic of discussion in these hearings was what specific interrogation techniques are permitted in what environments, with which DOD detainees, by whom, and when. And the answers have included a whole lot of confusion. If the Pentagon’s top minds can’t sort these matters out after exhaustive debate and preparation, how in the world do we expect our enlisted men and women to do so?
Confusion about the rules results in abuses in the field. We need a clear, simple, and consistent standard, and we have it in the Army Field Manual on Interrogation. That’s not just my opinion, but that of many more distinguished military minds than mine. I would refer you to a letter expressing strong support for this amendment, signed by 28 former high-ranking military officers, including General Joseph Hoar, who commanded Centcom; General John Shalikashvili, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs; RADM John Hutson and RADM Don Guter, who each served as the Navy’s top JAG; and LTGEN Claudia Kennedy, who served as Deputy Chief of Staff for Army Intelligence. These and other distinguished officers believe that the abuses at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and elsewhere took place in part because our soldiers received ambiguous instructions, which in some cases authorized treatment that went beyond what the Field Manual allows, and that, had the Manual been followed across the board, we could have avoided the prisoner abuse scandal. Mr. President, wouldn’t any of us do whatever we could to have prevented that? By passing this amendment, our service members can follow the Manual consistently from now on. Our troops deserve no less.
Cruel, Inhumane, Degrading Treatment
The second part of this amendment really shouldn’t be objectionable to anyone since I’m actually not proposing anything new. The prohibition against cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment has been a longstanding principle in both law and policy in the United States. Before I get into why this amendment is necessary, let me first review the history.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948, states simply that “No one shall be subject to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which the U.S. is a signatory, states the same. The binding Convention Against Torture, negotiated by the Reagan administration and ratified by the Senate, prohibits cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment. On last year’s DOD Authorization bill, the Senate passed a bipartisan amendment reaffirming that no detainee in U.S. custody can be subject to torture or cruel treatment, as the U.S. has long defined those terms. All of this seems to be common sense, in accordance with longstanding American values.
But since last year’s DOD bill, a strange legal determination was made that the prohibition in the Convention Against Torture against cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment does not legally apply to foreigners held outside the U.S. They can, apparently, be treated inhumanely. This is the administration’s position, even though Judge Abe Soafer, who negotiated the Convention Against Torture for President Reagan, said in a recent letter that the Reagan administration never intended the prohibition against cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment to apply only on U.S. soil.
What all this means is that America is the only country in the world that asserts a legal right to engage in cruel and inhuman treatment. But the crazy thing is that it is not even necessary, because the Administration has said that it will not engage in cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment as a matter of policy. What this also means is that confusion about the rules becomes rampant again. We have so many differing legal standards and loopholes that our lawyers and generals are confused – just imagine our troops serving in prisons and the field.
So the amendment I am offering simply codifies what is current policy and reaffirms what was assumed to be existing law for years. In light of the administration’s stated commitment, it should require no change in our current interrogation and detention practices. What it would do is restore clarity on a simple and fundamental question: Does America treat people inhumanely? My answer is no, and from all I’ve seen, America’s answer has always been no.
Mr. President, let me just close by noting that I hold no brief for the prisoners. I do hold a brief for the reputation of the United States of America. We are Americans, and we hold ourselves to humane standards of treatment of people no matter how evil or terrible they may be. To do otherwise undermines our security, but it also undermines our greatness as a nation. We are not simply any other country. We stand for something more in the world – a moral mission, one of freedom and democracy and human rights at home and abroad. We are better than these terrorists, and we will we win. The enemy we fight has no respect for human life or human rights. They don’t deserve our sympathy. But this isn’t about who they are. This is about who we are. These are the values that distinguish us from our enemies.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
For Immediate Release
Wednesday, Oct 05, 2005
Washington D.C. ¬– Senator McCain delivered the following statement today from the Senate floor on the Amendment on (1) the Army Field Manual and (2) Cruel, Inhumane, Degrading Treatment, amendment #1977:
Mr. President, I call up amendment #1977, which is filed at the desk.
The Department of Defense Appropriations bill is one of the most important funding measures considered by Congress. Equally important is the Department of Defense Authorization bill, and it is very unfortunate that we are forced to consider this funding measure without having completed our important work on the authorization bill. Despite the efforts of the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Armed Services Committee, who have worked to bring up and dispense with the authorization bill in a reasonable manner, they have been unable to reach an agreement with the leadership. As a result, the authorizers have filed the authorization bill and a procedural vote will occur on it this evening.
The Senate has an obligation to address the authorizing legislation, just as it has an obligation to deal with the issue that apparently led to the bill being pulled from the floor – America’s treatment of its detainees. Several weeks ago I received a letter from Captain Ian Fishback, a member of the 82nd Airborne Division at Fort Bragg, and a veteran of combat in Afghanistan and Iraq. Over 17 months he struggled to get answers from his chain of command to a basic question: what standards apply to the treatment of enemy detainees? But he found no answers. In his remarkable letter, he pleads with Congress, asking us to take action, to establish standards, to clear up the confusion – not for the good of the terrorists, but for the good of our soldiers and our country. The Captain closes his letter by saying, “I strongly urge you to do justice to your men and women in uniform. Give them clear standards of conduct that reflect the ideals they risk their lives for.” I believe that the Congress has a responsibility to answer this call – a call that has come not just from this one brave soldier but from so many of our men and women in uniform.
We owe it to them, Mr. President. We sent them to fight for us in Afghanistan and Iraq. We placed extraordinary pressure on them to extract intelligence from detainees. But then we threw out the rules that our soldiers had trained on, and replaced them with a confusing and constantly changing array of standards. We demanded intelligence without ever clearly telling our troops what was permitted and what was forbidden. And then when things went wrong, we blamed them and we punished them. We have to do better than that.
I can understand why some administration lawyers might want ambiguity, so that every hypothetical option is theoretically open, even those the President has said he does not want to exercise. But war does not occur in theory, and our troops are not served by ambiguity. They are crying out for clarity. The Congress cannot shrink from this duty, we cannot hide our heads, pulling bills from the floor and avoiding votes. We owe it to our soldiers, during this time of war, to take a stand.
And so while I would prefer to offer this amendment to the DOD Authorization bill, I am left with no choice but to offer it to this appropriations measure. I would note that I am offering this amendment in accordance with the options afforded under Rule 16 of the Standing Rules of the Senate. The amendment I will now offer combines the two amendments that I previously filed to the authorizing measure.
This amendment would (1) establish the Army Field Manual as the uniform standard for the interrogation of Department of Defense detainees and (2) prohibit cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment of persons in the detention of the U.S. government.
Mr. President, to fight terrorism we need intelligence. That much is obvious. What should also be obvious is that the intelligence we collect must be reliable and acquired humanely, under clear standards understood by all our fighting men and women. To do differently would not only offend our values as Americans, but undermine our war effort, because abuse of prisoners harms – not helps – us in the war on terror. First, subjecting prisoners to abuse leads to bad intelligence, because under torture a detainee will tell his interrogator anything to make the pain stop. Second, mistreatment of our prisoners endangers U.S. troops who might be captured by the enemy – if not in this war, then in the next. And third, prisoner abuses exact on us a terrible toll in the war of ideas, because inevitably these abuses become public. When they do, the cruel actions of a few darken the reputation of our country in the eyes of millions. American values should win against all others in any war of ideas, and we can’t let prisoner abuse tarnish our image.
And yet reports of detainee abuse continue to emerge, in large part, I believe, because of confusion in the field as to what is permitted and what is not. The amendment I am proposing will go a long way toward clearing up this confusion.
Army Field Manual
The first part of this amendment would establish the Army Field Manual as the uniform standard for the interrogation of Department of Defense detainees. The Army Field Manual and its various editions have served America well, through wars against both regular and irregular foes. It embodies the values Americans have embraced for generations, while preserving the ability of our interrogators to extract critical intelligence from ruthless foes. Never has this been more important than today, in the midst of the war on terror.
The Army Field Manual authorizes interrogation techniques that have proven effective in extracting life-saving information from the most hardened enemy prisoners. It is consistent with our laws and, most importantly, our values. Let us not forget that al-Qaeda sought not just to destroy American lives on September 11, but American values – our way of life and all we cherish. We fight not just to preserve our lives and liberties but also American values, and we will never allow the terrorists to take those away. In this war that we must win - that we will win - we must never simply fight evil with evil.
This amendment would establish the Army Field Manual as the standard for interrogation of all detainees held in DOD custody. The Manual has been developed by the Executive Branch for its own uses, and a new edition, written to take into account the needs of the war on terror and with a new classified annex, is due to be issued soon. My amendment would not set the Field Manual in stone – it could be changed at any time.
The advantage of setting a standard for interrogation based on the Field Manual is to cut down on the significant level of confusion that still exists with respect to which interrogation techniques are allowed. The Armed Services Committee has held hearings with a slew of high-level Defense Department officials, from regional commanders, to judge advocate generals, to the Department’s deputy general counsel. A chief topic of discussion in these hearings was what specific interrogation techniques are permitted in what environments, with which DOD detainees, by whom, and when. And the answers have included a whole lot of confusion. If the Pentagon’s top minds can’t sort these matters out after exhaustive debate and preparation, how in the world do we expect our enlisted men and women to do so?
Confusion about the rules results in abuses in the field. We need a clear, simple, and consistent standard, and we have it in the Army Field Manual on Interrogation. That’s not just my opinion, but that of many more distinguished military minds than mine. I would refer you to a letter expressing strong support for this amendment, signed by 28 former high-ranking military officers, including General Joseph Hoar, who commanded Centcom; General John Shalikashvili, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs; RADM John Hutson and RADM Don Guter, who each served as the Navy’s top JAG; and LTGEN Claudia Kennedy, who served as Deputy Chief of Staff for Army Intelligence. These and other distinguished officers believe that the abuses at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and elsewhere took place in part because our soldiers received ambiguous instructions, which in some cases authorized treatment that went beyond what the Field Manual allows, and that, had the Manual been followed across the board, we could have avoided the prisoner abuse scandal. Mr. President, wouldn’t any of us do whatever we could to have prevented that? By passing this amendment, our service members can follow the Manual consistently from now on. Our troops deserve no less.
Cruel, Inhumane, Degrading Treatment
The second part of this amendment really shouldn’t be objectionable to anyone since I’m actually not proposing anything new. The prohibition against cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment has been a longstanding principle in both law and policy in the United States. Before I get into why this amendment is necessary, let me first review the history.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948, states simply that “No one shall be subject to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which the U.S. is a signatory, states the same. The binding Convention Against Torture, negotiated by the Reagan administration and ratified by the Senate, prohibits cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment. On last year’s DOD Authorization bill, the Senate passed a bipartisan amendment reaffirming that no detainee in U.S. custody can be subject to torture or cruel treatment, as the U.S. has long defined those terms. All of this seems to be common sense, in accordance with longstanding American values.
But since last year’s DOD bill, a strange legal determination was made that the prohibition in the Convention Against Torture against cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment does not legally apply to foreigners held outside the U.S. They can, apparently, be treated inhumanely. This is the administration’s position, even though Judge Abe Soafer, who negotiated the Convention Against Torture for President Reagan, said in a recent letter that the Reagan administration never intended the prohibition against cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment to apply only on U.S. soil.
What all this means is that America is the only country in the world that asserts a legal right to engage in cruel and inhuman treatment. But the crazy thing is that it is not even necessary, because the Administration has said that it will not engage in cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment as a matter of policy. What this also means is that confusion about the rules becomes rampant again. We have so many differing legal standards and loopholes that our lawyers and generals are confused – just imagine our troops serving in prisons and the field.
So the amendment I am offering simply codifies what is current policy and reaffirms what was assumed to be existing law for years. In light of the administration’s stated commitment, it should require no change in our current interrogation and detention practices. What it would do is restore clarity on a simple and fundamental question: Does America treat people inhumanely? My answer is no, and from all I’ve seen, America’s answer has always been no.
Mr. President, let me just close by noting that I hold no brief for the prisoners. I do hold a brief for the reputation of the United States of America. We are Americans, and we hold ourselves to humane standards of treatment of people no matter how evil or terrible they may be. To do otherwise undermines our security, but it also undermines our greatness as a nation. We are not simply any other country. We stand for something more in the world – a moral mission, one of freedom and democracy and human rights at home and abroad. We are better than these terrorists, and we will we win. The enemy we fight has no respect for human life or human rights. They don’t deserve our sympathy. But this isn’t about who they are. This is about who we are. These are the values that distinguish us from our enemies.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Saturday, October 08, 2005
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger looks to Mccain
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger looks to Mccain
is turning to one of the best known political reformers
Arizona Senator John McCain
for help promoting his "year of reform"
ballot initiatives.
http://kvoa.com/Global/story.asp?S=3952932&nav=HMO6
is turning to one of the best known political reformers
Arizona Senator John McCain
for help promoting his "year of reform"
ballot initiatives.
http://kvoa.com/Global/story.asp?S=3952932&nav=HMO6
Monday, October 03, 2005
A Time For McCain?
A Time For McCain?
Only 29 percent of Americans say they trust government,
down from 40 percent in 2000.
McCainism -- whether practiced by the senator or by
some other charismatic campaigner
will eventually have its moment.
http://www.washingtonpost.com
Only 29 percent of Americans say they trust government,
down from 40 percent in 2000.
McCainism -- whether practiced by the senator or by
some other charismatic campaigner
will eventually have its moment.
http://www.washingtonpost.com
Saturday, October 01, 2005
Peace mom meets Senator McCain
Peace mom meets Senator McCain
Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan has met with a prominent lawmaker who supports the Iraq war. Sheehan thanked Senator John McCain for meeting with her Tuesday, but she came away disappointed.
The Arizona Republican also seemed disappointed in the Washington meeting. He says it had been misrepresented to him as including some of his constituents. Only one person in Sheehan's small delegation has ties to the state, and that person no longer lives there.
see more at.....
http://www.kcentv.com/news/c-article.php?cid=3&nid=3969
Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan has met with a prominent lawmaker who supports the Iraq war. Sheehan thanked Senator John McCain for meeting with her Tuesday, but she came away disappointed.
The Arizona Republican also seemed disappointed in the Washington meeting. He says it had been misrepresented to him as including some of his constituents. Only one person in Sheehan's small delegation has ties to the state, and that person no longer lives there.
see more at.....
http://www.kcentv.com/news/c-article.php?cid=3&nid=3969
Tuesday, September 27, 2005
What percent of the Hispanic population in Arizona are here illegally?
What percent of the Hispanic population in Arizona are here illegally?
Republican - 33%
Democrat - 41%
Independent - 38%
Not registered - 45%
Caucasian - 36%
Hispanic - 41%
Other - 43%
Under 35 - 41%
35-54 - 35%
55 and older - 39%
Total - 39%
Source: Behavior Research Center
see more info at................
http://www.dailystar.com/dailystar/news/94138.php
Republican - 33%
Democrat - 41%
Independent - 38%
Not registered - 45%
Caucasian - 36%
Hispanic - 41%
Other - 43%
Under 35 - 41%
35-54 - 35%
55 and older - 39%
Total - 39%
Source: Behavior Research Center
see more info at................
http://www.dailystar.com/dailystar/news/94138.php
Sunday, September 25, 2005
abuse of Iraqi prisoners by U.S
Senator John McCain said Sunday that abuse of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. soldiers, alleged anew in a report and under investigation again by the army, is hurting the country's image abroad.
"We've got to have it stopped," McCain (R-Ariz.) said on This Week on ABC.
"I don't know if these allegations are true or not, but they
have to be investigated."
Human Rights Watch issued a report Friday based on
interviews with a captain and two sergeants who served
in a battalion of the 82nd Airborne Division stationed
at a military base near Fallujah. The report alleged that army soldiers systematically tortured Iraqi detainees from 2003 into 2004, hitting them with baseball bats and dousing them with chemicals.
see Canada news at............
http://www.canada.com/news/world/story.html?id=69419b40-25f3-4c8f-81b8-f721eb84c893
"We've got to have it stopped," McCain (R-Ariz.) said on This Week on ABC.
"I don't know if these allegations are true or not, but they
have to be investigated."
Human Rights Watch issued a report Friday based on
interviews with a captain and two sergeants who served
in a battalion of the 82nd Airborne Division stationed
at a military base near Fallujah. The report alleged that army soldiers systematically tortured Iraqi detainees from 2003 into 2004, hitting them with baseball bats and dousing them with chemicals.
see Canada news at............
http://www.canada.com/news/world/story.html?id=69419b40-25f3-4c8f-81b8-f721eb84c893
Thursday, September 08, 2005
Happy Birthday Senator John McCain
Happy Birthday Senator John McCain!
Senator John McCain celebrated his 69th birthday with President George W. Bush last Monday, August 29th. Senator McCain greeted the President at Luke Air Force Base.
President Bush was in Arizona for a roundtable discussion on his way to Southern California to commemorate the 60th Anniversary of the end of World War II.
Senator John McCain celebrated his 69th birthday with President George W. Bush last Monday, August 29th. Senator McCain greeted the President at Luke Air Force Base.
President Bush was in Arizona for a roundtable discussion on his way to Southern California to commemorate the 60th Anniversary of the end of World War II.
Senator John McCain on the Death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist
Senator John McCain on the Death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist
"The Supreme Court lost one of its finest jurists and the Nation lost one of its finest legal minds. In his over 30 years on the bench, first as an associate and later as Chief Justice, William Rehnquist was an impartial and objective judge, who always held the Constitution above any personal beliefs or political persuasions.
"Chief Justice Rehnquist began his celebrated legal career in Phoenix, therefore, many Arizonans, including myself, are especially proud of his public service and his contributions toward furthering our Nation’s jurisprudence. The courage the Chief Justice exhibited in his battle against thyroid cancer while continuing his commitment to the American people and the Supreme Court was remarkable, but not surprising.
"There can be no doubt that our nation will miss Chief Justice Rehnquist’s scholarly demeanor and superb leadership. I trust that the same integrity he brought to the highest court of our land will guide the President’s choice and the Senate’s consideration of the next Chief Justice"
"The Supreme Court lost one of its finest jurists and the Nation lost one of its finest legal minds. In his over 30 years on the bench, first as an associate and later as Chief Justice, William Rehnquist was an impartial and objective judge, who always held the Constitution above any personal beliefs or political persuasions.
"Chief Justice Rehnquist began his celebrated legal career in Phoenix, therefore, many Arizonans, including myself, are especially proud of his public service and his contributions toward furthering our Nation’s jurisprudence. The courage the Chief Justice exhibited in his battle against thyroid cancer while continuing his commitment to the American people and the Supreme Court was remarkable, but not surprising.
"There can be no doubt that our nation will miss Chief Justice Rehnquist’s scholarly demeanor and superb leadership. I trust that the same integrity he brought to the highest court of our land will guide the President’s choice and the Senate’s consideration of the next Chief Justice"
Senators McCain and Coburn Call on Congress to Make Sacrifices to Fund Hurricane Relief Effort
Senators McCain and Coburn Call on Congress to Make Sacrifices to Fund Hurricane Relief Effort
U.S. Senators John McCain and Tom Coburn, M.D. issued the following joint statement today calling on Congress to "lead by example" by cutting back on pork-barrel and other unnecessary spending to help fund the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
"Hurricane Katrina is one of the worst national tragedies in our history. Whenever our nation experiences a tragedy Americans come together and make sacrifices to help their neighbors. Individual Americans who are donating their time and money and opening their homes to evacuees are reminding us what sacrificing means. Sacrificing means giving up something you want in order give someone else something they need."
"If Congress wants to inspire the American people to continue to make sacrifices we need to be making sacrifices of our own. The costs of the recovery and relief effort will be enormous. Congress must do all that is necessary to fund essential relief and recovery efforts and help those in need. However, to the extent that it is possible, we should pay for this effort now rather than pass on even more debt to future generations
U.S. Senators John McCain and Tom Coburn, M.D. issued the following joint statement today calling on Congress to "lead by example" by cutting back on pork-barrel and other unnecessary spending to help fund the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
"Hurricane Katrina is one of the worst national tragedies in our history. Whenever our nation experiences a tragedy Americans come together and make sacrifices to help their neighbors. Individual Americans who are donating their time and money and opening their homes to evacuees are reminding us what sacrificing means. Sacrificing means giving up something you want in order give someone else something they need."
"If Congress wants to inspire the American people to continue to make sacrifices we need to be making sacrifices of our own. The costs of the recovery and relief effort will be enormous. Congress must do all that is necessary to fund essential relief and recovery efforts and help those in need. However, to the extent that it is possible, we should pay for this effort now rather than pass on even more debt to future generations
Wednesday, August 24, 2005
Senator John McCain to Speak in the East Valley
Senator John McCain to Speak in the East Valley on Thursday
You are invited to a special meeting with Senator John McCain on Thursday, August 25th at 7:00 p.m. Senator McCain will discuss current events and take your questions.
The event is free and open to the public. Please email me at crystal@friendsofmccain.com if you have any questions.
Thursday, August 25, 2005
7:00 p.m.
Navajo Room at Mesa Community College
1833 West Southern Avenue
Mesa, Arizona 85202
You are invited to a special meeting with Senator John McCain on Thursday, August 25th at 7:00 p.m. Senator McCain will discuss current events and take your questions.
The event is free and open to the public. Please email me at crystal@friendsofmccain.com if you have any questions.
Thursday, August 25, 2005
7:00 p.m.
Navajo Room at Mesa Community College
1833 West Southern Avenue
Mesa, Arizona 85202
Monday, August 22, 2005
McCain Expresses Support for Judge John Roberts
Senator John McCain Expresses Support for Supreme Court Nominee Judge John Roberts
I am pleased that the President has chosen Judge John Roberts as his nominee to the Supreme Court. Judge Roberts would bring a wealth of experience to the nations highest bench having served as an attorney in private practice, as an advisor and Deputy Solicitor General at the Department of Justice and as a federal appeals court judge. I look forward to a smooth confirmation process and a swift up-or-down vote for Judge Roberts.
http://www.friendsofmccain.com/
I am pleased that the President has chosen Judge John Roberts as his nominee to the Supreme Court. Judge Roberts would bring a wealth of experience to the nations highest bench having served as an attorney in private practice, as an advisor and Deputy Solicitor General at the Department of Justice and as a federal appeals court judge. I look forward to a smooth confirmation process and a swift up-or-down vote for Judge Roberts.
http://www.friendsofmccain.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)