Politics with Marc Ambinder

June 2009 Archives

Jun 30 2009, 8:14PM

Senator Franken: Part Hillary, Part Teddy, Not Liddy

What can we expect from Sen. Al Franken? My colleague, Jay Newton-Small at Time, makes some predictions about his impact here. All true, I say. But I'd add a few other points. First, you can fully expect Franken to follow the Hillary model for how to be a celebrity Senator. (It's also the Obama model, to a lesser degree.) That is, keep your head down. Don't do a lot of TV, at first. Go genuflect to Robert Byrd and sit in his ornate Capitol office and let the giant of West Virginia ramble on about the Romans and talk about the minutiae of Senate rules. In other words, don't act like you're a celebrity senator deserving of more airtime than Mark Begich or Tom Udall. Franken will do his homework, study hard and pay attention to constituent services just like Clinton did when she came to the Senate in 2001. Anyone who expects Air America appearances, books, or showboating at hearings will probably be disappointed.

More

Jun 30 2009, 7:30PM

The Day In Politics, 6/30

Today, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled in favor of Al Franken; a faith-based coalition started airing a handful of health care radio ads; and the Obama administration announced a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency.

We also rated Norm Coleman's concession; Sarah Palin's political future; the difficulty (or ease) of eliminating Don't Ask, Don't Tell; whether Franken's victory really gives Democrats 60 Senate seats; and we discussed whether the Justice Department is taking aim at Oracle.

Tomorrow: President Obama holds a health care town hall meeting in Annandale, VA.

Jun 30 2009, 7:00PM

The Invisible Primary, 6/30

Tracking to GOP race to 2012

A Vanity Fair article by Todd Purdum painted an unflattering picture of Gov. Sarah Palin; Palin told Runner's World that she'd probably beat Obama in distance running; Mike Huckabee will deliver a keynote speech at a conservative dinner in Syracuse, NY in October; and Newt Gingrich addressed a crowd of 800 at a fundraiser for gubernatorial candidate Scott Walker in Milwaulkee.

Jun 30 2009, 5:49PM

Is Oracle In The Justice Department's Crosshairs Again?

In May, Christine Varney, the new antitrust chief at the Justice Department, promised to scrutinize high-tech mergers more closely than her Bush-era predecessors. In the early Obama administration, talk of a possible antitrust action has focused almost exclusively on Google. The latest example is this Sunday Times profile of the apple-cheeked Googler whose job it is to furiously spin decision makers on the idea that Google is not really so big after all. But that's not the only antitrust issue lurking. If the recession, the energy bill, the prospects for health care, and a dozen other stories weren't already dominating headlines, yesterday's news that the Justice Department is taking a closer look at Oracle's $7.4-billion purchase of Sun would be a really big deal.

More

Jun 30 2009, 4:58PM

60! Wait, No... 58!

The headline over at Talking Points Memo right now is "60!" in reference to Al Franken's pending arrival in the Senate, reflecting the fact that Democrats now have 60 seats, a filibuster-proof majority. At least on paper. In reality, it's not quite so simple. A quiet concern in the White House is the logistical difficulty of getting Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd, both of them long absent with serious health issues, to the Senate floor to cast a vote. This is putting additional pressure on conservative Democrats like Evan Bayh to toe the party line, and raising the importance of  Olympia Snow and Susan Collins, considered to be the two most gettable Republicans on issues like health care.

Jun 30 2009, 4:50PM

Coleman Concedes, And Handles It Pretty Well

So after the long, long battle in court, Sen. Norm Coleman (R) has conceded to Al Franken (D).

Appearing in St. Paul, Minnesota, Coleman smiled and urged unity. He didn't look particularly upset, and he didn't look like the decision had hit him particularly hard. As reporters questioned him about his political past and future, instead of waving them away, he answered calmly.

"I've been blessed to represent the greatest state in the nation," Coleman said. "I'm proud of my 32 years of public service, and I'm here today to offer my congratulations to Al Franken."

Coleman said he'll start "talking a little bit about what my future is" next week, and that he won't have any word about his next step until then. Though he's had time to think about it, that future may be up in the air; after holding office and losing a statewide race, it can be difficult to win another one.

More

Jun 30 2009, 4:35PM

New Consumer Financial Protection Agency A Mixed-Bag

The Obama administration unveiled their plan for creating an agency to regulate the financial products offered to consumers. Measures from the government to attempt to protect consumers from products leading to unfair or deceptive lending are not novel. But this agency hopes to take consumer protection a step further by intensifying such efforts and promoting access to financial products as well. I applaud the administration's desire to protect consumers but wonder if its dual purpose will lead to internal conflict.

Let's start with the good. This new agency will implement and enforce new transparency standards for consumer lending. That's important. Even the most brazen of free marketers will have trouble arguing that clarity and simplicity are not valid goals for regulations. If individuals do not have full, clear and accurate information, markets cannot work.

More

Jun 30 2009, 3:52PM

Franken Def. Coleman

238 days--over two thirds of a year--after Election Day, Al Franken has won his U.S. Senate race against Norm Coleman, as the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled in his favor 5-0 after the protracted legal battle that saw an election recount, allegations of unconstitutionality by Coleman's lawyers and of fraud by partisan observers, and 32 absentee ballots allegedly left in an election official's car. Read the opinion here. Coleman reportedly has not ruled out a federal case.

So the Democrats are up to 60 Senate seats with this result--which many in Washington thought would happen eventually--presuming Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) certifies Franken, as he's said he would if the court ruled in Franken's favor.

With 60 seats, Democrats can now break Republican filibusters and pass whatever legislation they want...as long as the centrists in their caucus, particularly Sens. Arlen Specter (PA), Ben Nelson (NE), Mark Pryor (AK), and Blanche Lincoln (AK) agree...or as long as they can win over a centrist Republican like Sen. Susan Collins (ME) or Olympia Snowe (ME). As we saw with the stimulus, the clump of senators in the middle possess a lot of influence...in that regard, not much has changed, though Franken's vote should help.

Jun 30 2009, 2:11PM

A Faith-Based Push For Health Care

A coalition of progressively minded faith-based groups is waging a campaign to support health care reform (which launched in May), and it's put out a series of new ads that will air on Christian radio today through July 4, targeting senators in Arkansas, Colorado, Louisiana, Nebraska, and North Carolina--states belonging loosely to the Bible belt whose moderate senators often cast swing votes in the upper chamber--as they return home for Congress's July 4 recess.

The faith-based angle on health care, for this coalition, differs notably from the talking points offered by President Obama and reform opponents in Washington, who have stuck mostly to talking about costs: Obama has sought to hammer in the point that national health care costs are unsustainable, while strategy memos on both the Democratic and Republican sides this month have advised, based on polling data, that talking about costs and government spending resonates most thoroughly with the public.

More

Jun 30 2009, 1:12PM

Sarah Palin: Stayin Alive

Todd S. Purdum paints a gruesome picture of Sarah Palin, politically speaking, in his Vanity Fair piece that came out today. It's rife with examples of two-faced moments and old former allies who are now estranged from Palin because, as they intimate, she keeps friends close until they're no longer useful, or she takes disagreements personally, and fallings out ensue.

It's lurid, to say the least.

Purdum's article reads like a post-mortem, but it's not: Palin's political fortunes are still very much alive. A recent round of polling showed Palin neck and neck with Mike Huckabee as the most popular politician among Republicans nationwide.

More

Jun 30 2009, 10:55AM

Clinton, Truman, Obama and Gays in the Military

President Obama tried to reassure gay leaders last night that he was still with them on eliminating the military's don't-ask-don't-tell policy. His press secretary, Robert Gibbs, said that it would be gone by the time that Obama sees reelection. At this point, I take them at their word, but what's interesting is that two Democratic presidents have now stumbled on this issue, showing the gap between campaign promises and what's at least perceived to be political reality. A third Democratic president offers a better way.

More

Jun 30 2009, 10:16AM

Waxman Markey And "Special Interest Giveaways"

On his Atlantic Correspondents blog, Conor Clarke tackles the politics of carbon credit distribution in the House's cap and trade energy bill, discussing whether the bill is, as some have said, chock full of "special interest giveaways":
Sure, the distribution of permits is still very important. When the government gives permits to select recipients, it is rewarding one industry over another, and favoring "incumbent" companies over those that might enter the market in the future. I think that is unfair. But those concerns about fairness are entirely separate from concerns about the environmental effectiveness of the bill. A cap and trade bill that gives all the permits to Donald Trump will be just as effective in reducing emissions as a bill that auctions off all of the permits and uses the revenue to fund an across the board payroll tax cut.

Jun 29 2009, 8:00PM

The Day In Politics, 6/29

Today, we learned that President Obama and Hugo Chavez have one thing in common (Honduras); the Supreme Court disagreed with Sonia Sotomayor; which Sotomayor's critics pounced on; Obama hosted an LGBT Pride Month reception, despite skepticism about him among gays; and Obama met with Colombian President Alvaro Uribe and talked trade.

We also pondered why the SCOTUS decision won't bring back affirmative action as a hot-button issue; and the warm response Obama got from LGBT attendees at the reception.

More

Jun 29 2009, 7:44PM

Obama's Warm LGBT Reception

Despite skepticism among the gay community and a wary sense that President Obama might not have the courage to deliver on his campaign promises, he got a pretty good reception from LGBT attendees at his Pride Month reception at the White House Monday.

Obama drew early and enthusiastic applause from the crowd of 250-300 LGBT families, volunteers, community leaders, federal employees, state and local lawmakers, and heads of LGBT lobbying/activist organizations gathered in the East Room as he called out greetings to openly gay appointees and gay rights activists, then delivered remarks for about 20 minutes. (Hear audio of Obama's remarks here.)

"Welcome to your White House," he said to the crowd as he addressed it.

More

Jun 29 2009, 6:15PM

The Invisible Primary, 6/29

Tracking the GOP race to 2012

Rep. Mike Pence will travel to Iowa in July; Gov. Tim Pawlenty spoke at the Arkansas GOP's annual governor's dinner in Little Rock Friday and told reporters Gov. Mark Sanford's affair shouldn't be viewed politically, also saying the scandal had damaged the GOP; he also said this weekend that he won't delay Al Franken's certification as a senator if the Minnesota Supreme Court rules in Franken's favor; and Gov. Sarah Palin traveled to Kosovo last week to visit Alaska National Guard troops, on a trip that continued through the weekend.

Jun 29 2009, 5:15PM

Obama Meets With Uribe; Concerns Over Colombia Deal Remain

President Obama met with Colombian President Alvaro Uribe today, discussing a trade pact that had the full support of President Bush but stalled under opposition from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, congressional Democrats, and labor unions. Bush had pushed for the deal in the face of staunch opposition in Congress, and his administration organized trips to Colombia for U.S. lawmakers to visit with government and business leaders in the hopes of winning their votes. (Democrats, as well as Republicans, traveled there.)

Labor unions remain staunchly opposed to the deal, their main argument being reports of Colombian-military-sanctioned killings of trade unionists, and Pelosi has no plans to bring the agreement to the floor any time soon, according to her office. The safety of Colombian labor leaders needs to be dealt with before the content of an agreement can be ironed out, spokesman Brendan Daly said.

More

Jun 29 2009, 3:58PM

Sotomayor's Critics Seize On SCOTUS Decision

In ruling against Sonia Sotomayor's appellate decision in Ricci v. DeStefano--the case brought by white firefighters in New Haven who claimed they were wrongfully denied promotions after an examination yielded no firefighters of color eligible for advancement--the Supreme Court has provided Sotomayor's critics with fodder today.

An official statement from Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell:
The Supreme Court today recognized that Judge Sotomayor's panel wrongly deprived the New Haven firefighters of equal justice under the law.  Not only did Judge Sotomayor misapply the law, but the perfunctory way in which she and her panel dismissed the firefighters' meritorious claims of unfair treatment is particularly troubling.  It stands in marked contrast to the way the Supreme Court addressed this very serious matter, underscoring my concern that she may have allowed her personal or political agenda to cloud her judgment and affect her ruling.

More

Jun 29 2009, 11:35AM

Obama Hosts LGBT Pride Reception; Gays Aren't Yet Convinced

President Obama will be hosting a reception at the White House this afternoon, at 3:30, honoring LGBT pride month. But there's still a sentiment among gays that he hasn't yet delivered what he promised on the campaign trail, and some in attendance (at least a couple leaders of gay rights groups will be there) are skeptical of his administration.

The administration's stance on the Defense of Marriage Act--which the Department of Justice recently defended--and a lack of progress on Don't Ask, Don't Tell lie at the heart of their frustrations.

More

Jun 29 2009, 11:23AM

After New Haven, Affirmative Action Is Not Back

Affirmative action had been fading from American political life for the past two decades. Yes, there have been occasionally controversial Supreme Court decisions and a few legislative battles but for the most part it's not dominated the life of Washington or conversation nationally. California is an exception here where the Ward Connerly-led efforts to overturn affiramtive action in higher education prevailed. But if you think back to the landmark Bakke decision of the 70s, affirmative action has nowhere near the potency it once did. Early in the Reagan administration there was thought to repealing Executive Order 11246, the Kennedy-era dictum that became the basis of federal affirmative action programs. But it was never repealed and for the most part the basic structures of affirmative action have remained in place in Washington and thus the country. Affirmative action has become a part of daily life in thousands of corporate HR offices and in government ones, too. It's not as aggressive as many would like and it hasn't faded away as others would wish.

More

Jun 29 2009, 10:39AM

Supreme Court Disagrees With Sotomayor On Ricci

The Supreme Court has overturned one of Sonia Sotomayor's more talked-about rulings, siding with a group of white firefighters in a 5-4 decision on Ricci v. DeStefano.

Sotomayor had ruled against the firefighters, who filed suit after being denied promotions because an examination for advancement yielded no eligible black firefighters. This case was prime fodder for Sotomayor's opponents, who insinuated racism on her part before any of the "wise Latina" quote was stirred with Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh's criticism--before, in fact, Sotomayor was named as President Obama's nominee.

Sotomayor was on a three-judge panel that rejected the complaint in an appeals court.

The reversal of her decision will likely provide more fodder. More on the decision later today...

Jun 29 2009, 9:40AM

Some Common Ground With Venezuela

The Obama administration's decision last week to open diplomatic relations with Venezuela got relatively little media fanfare, probably due to the unfolding situation in Iran. But it was significant, given that 1) chilly relations had given the appearance of warming when President Obama shook hands with Hugo Chavez at a summit in April, 2) Venezuela is a top supplier of oil to the U.S., and 3) Chavez has cultivated a relationship with Iran, specifically Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, backing the Iranian president's declared election victory and accusing the U.S. and Europe of stirring up the protests. Now the U.S. and Venezuela find themselves on the same side of the Honduran coup, at least.

Jun 26 2009, 10:45PM

Pelosi, Waxman, Markey, Slaughter Triumph

The margin of victory was small, but the significant can't be understated: in passing the largest and most ambitious overhaul to the nation's energy policy in decades, Democrats in the House of Representatives are celebrating a genuine policy accomplishment.  The bill is so big, so audacious, even in its watered down form, that if it somehow manages to pass the Senate, it will almost immediately change the lives and lifestyle of every American, the fortunes of major industries, and the economic future of regions, cities and towns. That's one of the reasons why opponents -- not opponents who thought it didn't go far enough, but the ones who were opposed to the cap-and-trade idea itself -- went to great lengths to fight back against it. This is one of those bills that does something.

More

Jun 26 2009, 6:02PM

Is Obama Moving Toward An Executive Order On Detention Policy?

The Washington Post and Pro-Publica [ed note: collaboration!] report that the White House counsel's office has drafted an executive order authorizing -- or, rather, asserting, that the President has the inherent authority to detain certain classes of people indefinitely.  (Update: Ben LaBolt, an Obama spokesperson, flatly denied the report to me. "There is no executive order. There just isn't one.") For what it's worth, administration officials say that the story seems to overwrite something that is common knowledge, that President Obama hasn't decided on a course of action yet, and that the task force he appointed to figure out these issues is weeks away from presenting its recommendations to the White House. It is not clear whether the draft executive order applies to detainees held at Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan, or in camps in Iraq, or detainees collected in future operations, or even in cases where suspected terrorists are identified in non-contiguous countries. I note, at 10:40 p.m., the Washington Post has softened the story a bit, referring to the "drafting" in the present. And the administration refuses to parse verb tenses with me -- is drafting, might draft -- those are still possible. "Have drafted" is apparently untrue.

More

Jun 26 2009, 5:58PM

Boehner's Friday Afternoon Treat

If you're like to watch some interesting television, flip on over to C-SPAN and watch House Minority Leader John Boehner read 300 pages worth of an energy bill. A delaying tactic? Yep. Will the vote be pushed into the morrow? Maybe. Anyway, the leader's staff is calling this a "Fili-Boehner."  I giggled. I admit it.

Jun 26 2009, 3:13PM

Greenpeace Wants None Of It

Some late news on the Waxman-Markey climate change legislation: Greenpeace, the influential activist environmental group, contends that industry lobbyists watered down the bill to the point where it won't do much of anything. The bill, they contend, would create a "whole new generation" of coal and nuclear plants and would not limit emissions in the volume they say current science required. Greenpeace's announcement won't do much to the vote count because most fellow travelers have already decided to oppose the bill for the same reasons, but it has become a news story, and that may influence the mood of the majority... and the mood of the majority may well influence the votes of individuals. 

Jun 26 2009, 2:37PM

A Provocative Preventative Detention Proposal

I've gotten a copy of the model detention proposal that Brookings' Benjamin Wittes and colleague Colleen Peppard have prepared.   Why is this paper so significant? It represents an effort -- one of the first -- to deal with an acute matter of national interest, and one that is by no means settled from the perspective of the government. And it will be read by the powers that be.  Here's a summary of its main points:  The two propose a model for a  "targeted and highly regulated detention authority " that supplants the authority granted to the president by Congress.  Why is this paper so significant? It repersents an effort to deal with an acute matter of national interest, and one that is by no means settled from the perspective of the government. 

More

Jun 26 2009, 2:15PM

Capital, Technology, Policy: The three critical ingredients to prevent climate change

The recent focus on climate change has been the House of Representatives, which is scheduled to vote on the Waxman-Markey bill today (or possibly tomorrow.) But a number of parallel, nonprofit efforts to cut carbon emissions are also ramping up. They include the Clinton Global Initiative, another effort by Richard Branson, and the Gigaton Throwdown, a project of a team of high-powered technology investors and academics that met in Washington Wednesday to share the results of an interesting study. The Gigaton folks want to move much faster and more aggressively to cut global carbon emissions than most people--they want to cut 5 to 7 billion tons (gigatons) of carbon from the atmosphere by 2020, and see the private sector playing a critical role in making this happen. They met to unveil what is essentially a feasibility study for what these ambitious reductions would entail as measured across eight different technologies, including wind, solar, plug-in electric, and--attention Republicans!--nuclear. The broader goal is to provide a "road map for laboratory-to-industry partnerships."

More

Jun 26 2009, 10:45AM

The Wittes Preventative Detention Proposal

The influential constitutional and national security thinker Benjamin Wittes has found a solution to the conundrum that is vexing the Obama administration's task force on detention policy: how does the United States simultaneously provide dangerous, non-triable detainees with due process rights and keep them, well, detained until (if ever) rehabilitated. 

More

Jun 26 2009, 9:25AM

What Barack Obama Owes Michael Jackson

They were born three years and 24 days apart. And a more than an ocean separated the only child of a Kenyan father and a Kansan mother and the Gary, Indiana kid who was the seventh of nine children. It would be wrong to read too much political meaning into the career of Michael Jackson and that of Barack Obama. (No one is thinking tonite that Hillary Clinton owes a debt of gratitude to Farrah Fawcett.) But it would be myopic to say that Jackson had a huge cultural impact and no political impact, either.

More

Jun 25 2009, 11:25PM

Democrats Growing Confident About Climate Bill Passage

Democrats on Capitol Hill say that historic and controversial climate change legislation is likely to pass the House of Representatives tomorrow.  A top Democratic aide estimated that Speaker Nancy Pelosi had banked just enough votes as of this evening. Included are a handful of Republicans. Other Democrats said that they weren't sure where the vote count stood, but that they expected the bill to pass. (Republicans say they're confident it will fail.) Late today, the AFL-CIO endorsed the bill, which might boost its fortunes among Democrats in Pennsylvania. And on the other side, the Chamber of Commerce said it would count the vote as "key," which means they'll hold a "yes" vote against lawmakers.

More

Jun 25 2009, 10:50PM

Dennis Ross's Dilemma Is Solved

Thursday, the National Security Council confirmed in a short statement that Dennis Ross, formerly of the State Department and a member of Washington's uber-establishment, will become the senior director for the "central region" at the NSC, giving him a portfolio that includes oversight of a wide swath of territory, including Iran.  For weeks -- months, even, Ross's status at the Department of State was unclear, even to his friends.

More

Jun 25 2009, 7:21PM

Useful Political Tweets Of The Day, 6/25

I follow more than 1,500 tweeps so you don't have to....

@radioiowa: The Blog: Kathie Obradovich is the new DMR political columnist: I've known Kathie Obradovich "for over .. http://tinyurl.com/lknrte

@kerryeleveld  Jared Polis presses House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton to move on DADT: http://www.youtube.com/user/JaredPolis31275

@AdamSerwer  read @AriMelber in @thenation on the recession and prison reform http://is.gd/1drcO then read me! http://tinyurl.com/cspjsa

@JaseLP: For an Originalist, Clarence Thomas certainly seems to hate the Fourth Amendment. #scotus #liberty

@PaulRieckhott: Army Times: DoD on the clock to plan stop-loss payments: http://tinyurl.com/kwvvz2

@michaelluo Perceptive story from NYT mag abt the fall of the black middle class with the contraction of the Detroit Three http://bit.ly/deWzy

Jun 25 2009, 7:00PM

The Day In Politics, 6/25

Today, Jenny Sanford put out a long, thoughtful statement on her husband; the U.S. Open sparked a climate change debate; and Dennis Ross was given a defined role.

We also considered whether Mark Sanford's admission will change politics; the new nomadism of economic displacement; how to read an Iranian news story; where Clarence Thomas would be if not for the Anita Hill scandal; Mitt Romney's image rehab; and whether fans will cheer or boo President Obama at the MLB All-Star Game.

More

Jun 25 2009, 6:11PM

Spy v. Spy: Joe Decides

Vice President Joe Biden has been asked to quickly mediate a long-standing institutional dispute between the Central Intelligence Agency and the Director of National Intelligence, a signal that President Obama's National Security Council could not reach a consensus, sources with knowledge of the situation said.

When Congress created the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in 2005, it neglected to specify how the DNI and the Central Intelligence Agency director would share authority. For decades, the CIA director had executive authority over the entire intelligence community, reported directly to the president, and would designate its station chiefs as the nation's intelligence representative for the country.

Beginning with the first DNI, John Negroponte, the new intelligence directors wanted more control over who served as the country's chief intelligence representative in foreign countries, reasoning that that there would be instances where the CIA's station chief might not be the best person for the job, and noting that the CIA was but one of 16 different intelligence agencies that served the president, policy-makers and the Department of Defense.  

Even more important -- and more institutionally tender -- the DNIs want the authority to coordinate and manage resources in those countries without having to go through the CIA director. Who reports to whom? Does a station chief have two masters? The answers -- Biden's answers -- could shape the future of the U.S. intelligence community.

In separate pleas to National Security Adviser James Jones, CIA director Leon Panetta and current DNI Dennis Blair asked for a speedy resolution. The New York Times reported that Blair, in a classified memo, simply granted himself expanded authority over appointments in early May, which Panetta, in an equally classified memo, quickly countermanded.

The Blair memo, known as ICB 402, contained provisions that had been agreed to by Panetta, but when it was circulated, career agency officials objected to its language, and Panetta registered their objections.  

There had been reports that John Brennan, Obama's top counterterrorism adviser and a former senior CIA official, was tasked by Jones with making the decision.  Brennan reportedly proposed a compromise, but the National Security Council, of which Biden is a member, could not agree on the details. Biden, who had access to classified intelligence as chairman of the Foreign Relations committee, will now the make decision, a sign, administration officials said, that ending the confusion about authority and chain-of-command was a critical, if not readily discussed, priority for President Obama.

Spokespeople for the White House, Biden's office, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the National Security Council did not comment. 

An ongoing conflict has the potential to create a personal rift between Blair and Panetta, who get along fairly well at the moment. With the new administration,  the number of station chief vacancies has grown. Some of Obama's national security advisers worry that chiefs were improperly supervised during the Bush administration, leading to charges of criminal misconduct in at least one instance. As the nation's top intelligence official, Admiral Blair wants the power to designate who represents the United States's intelligence interests in foreign countries, reasoning that the CIA's choice in certain cases might not be the right choice for the entire intelligence community. Blair does not seek the power to appoint stations chiefs, who primarily supervise clandestine and covert operations. Other intelligence observers worry that the CIA has used the system for, in the words of a former top agent, a "pre-retirement" circuit for aging agency bureaucrats. 

Beyond high-level political wrangling, the dispute has real ramifications on the ground. Traditionally, officers, analysts and managers from other agencies sought permission from the station chiefs before they entered a new country, and the station chief usually had veto power over their movements and operations. The government has created quick reaction task forces that are supposed to be able to flood a country or a region within days of being dispatched.  In some countries, the station chiefs do little -- think of Canada, where the U.S. intelligence community conducts most of its operations jointly with the native country's agencies. In other countries, the National Security Agency has far more personnel on the ground. 

Even before the DNI post was established, its critics questioned whether a new layer of bureaucracy would improve information sharing and coordination among the nations' 16 intelligence agencies. But the DNI was invested with few formal powers and almost no budget authority, largely a result of lobbying by the Department of Defense, which nominally controls the budget of the largest agency, the NSA, and several others. Reasonably, if the DNI can't appoint his own representatives, then he has indeed become a glorified presidential briefer. President Bush signed an executive order that modestly increased the DNI's authority... key word here is modestly. The daily access to President Obama is important, but controlling budgets and operational tasking is probably more useful. 

Jun 25 2009, 6:10PM

American Politics, With A New Skin

Just in time for the fourth of July, the Atlantic is pleased to unveil an easier-to-read, gently refurbished politics website. It'll be easier to see more content, more quickly, and it'll be easier to find content by your favorite authors. 


The site is curated by the Atlantic's political editor, Marc Ambinder, and features writing by Chris Good and contributions by Matt Cooper and other reporters. Bob Cohn, the Atlantic.com's editorial director, is the boss.

As always, our aim is to provide you with instant, forward-leaning analysis of the days events, with conceptual scoops that help you understand Washington and politics, and with a chronicle of the most active period of government in at least a quarter century. 

We're not automatons, and you'll see certain themes repeat themselves. Our quirkiness is one way we distinguish the site from our many worthy competitors. To borrow the favorite metaphor of jurisprudence, when we make judgments, we do as umpires or analysts, not as participants. 

The editors of this site are human and have political biases, but -- and this is important -- we are humble enough to know that there is rarely a right answer or a single perspective that explains it all. Don't mistake humility for relativity: we prize intellectual honest, clear thinking and plain speaking. 

We continue to be grateful for the time our readers spend on our site, and we hope that this reskin makes that experience a little more pleasant. 

Jun 25 2009, 5:40PM

Question Of The Day, Answered

Some reader responses to our question of the day, which was, "As public admissions/apologies go, Mark Sanford's was remarkably open, perhaps verging on too much information. How does Sanford's press conference stack up to the historical likes of Clinton, Spitzer, and Vitter?":

From cat:
The press conference verged on criminal. I cannot believe his staff let him come out and ramble like that. TMI comes to mind. It was like watching a train wreck. The staff is obviously very angry at him.

More

Jun 25 2009, 5:19PM

The Invisible Primary, 6/26

Tracking the GOP race to 2012

Tim Pawlenty opposes the climate change bill moving through the House; the Star Tribune speculates that Mark Sanford's fall helps him; Haley Barbour will headline a GOP fundraiser in Iowa tonight; and Sarah Palin blasted a blogger for doctoring a photo of her and her son, Trig, replacing Trig's face with that of a conservative Alaska talk show host.

Jun 25 2009, 2:16PM

The MLB All-Star Game As Obama Referendum

President Obama will throw out the first pitch at the MLB All-Star Game in St. Louis July 14, becoming the fourth sitting president to do so (Kennedy, Nixon, and Ford being the others). Obama is no stranger to St. Louis--he held a massive, record-breaking campaign rally there under the Gateway Arch in October, drawing 100,000; he spent his 100th day as president there, holding a town hall meeting, talking about the economy, health care, and energy/the environment in the suburbs.

Sporting events offer a remarkably raw window into the sentiments of the hoi polloi, and Obama, no doubt, will be judged--by cheers, boos, or both. Although it's the first pitch, fans will have been enjoying the festivities all day. They won't be on their first beers--and they won't be afraid to show their true colors. Just ask President Bush, who was booed and jeered by Washington Nationals fans when he threw out a first pitch in March of 2008. Or Dick Cheney, who got a similar reception in DC in 2006. That wasn't the end for Bush, though--he was greeted by an enthusiastic, hometown cheer when he returned to the mound at Rangers Ballpark for a first pitch in Dallas this April for the team he formerly owned.

More

Jun 25 2009, 2:04PM

What Mitt Romney's Doing Right

John Ensign and Mark Sanford are revealing TMI. Sarah Palin is struggling with her state legislature. John Huntsman, Jr. is headed to China. Mike Huckabee is ubiquitous.  Haley Barbour is meeting with strategists in smoky back rooms. Tim Pawlenty has to get through the rest of his term.

And Mitt Romney?

Mitt Romney is writing a book. His final draft is due to a publisher by the end of July, and it will hit bookshelves in 2010, right at the time the Republican Party will be settling on a communications strategy for the midterm elections.

Romney and his team are clear about his political future. The door to another presidential race is open, but that would be true regardless of how Romney spends his days. It adds nothing to ask whether Romney will run for president.

The prevailing narrative today is that Romney has risen to the top of the 2012 Invisible Primary because he's the last man standing.

True, Romney hasn't made any obvious mistakes. But his rising standing is a consequence of decisions he's made, and not just a result of the luck.

  1. Romney is picking and choosing his battles. He shares an Obama-esque disdain for the superficial daily scrum that cable channels whip up. It's a credit to his communications team that he can appear on television once every two or three weeks and seem to be part of the dialog. When Romney has something to say, he'll find a venue to say it.  On auto restructuring, on the Republican stimulus plan, on a free market approach to health care, on the Employee Free Choice Act, and on missile defense, Romney matches his opinions to key constituencies, and he always draws respectful news coverage.  What's Romney saying about Mark Sanford? Nothing. (Mike Huckabee called into Fox. He's pursuing a different communications strategy.)
  1. He's not consumed by anger or sarcasm.  Romney can get angry, and he can be sarcastic. But his public appearances today are calm, measured; his interviews are given in dignified settings. Romney's political team believes that the public has no appetite for presidential adversaries who are driven by personal dislike.  To Romney, this dignifies the office of the presidency.
  1. He's not frantic about the invisible primary.  Obviously, Romney has a base of staff, donors and supporters, and he doesn't need to panic about grabbing strategists and consultants who might defect from other potential candidates. He keeps in touch with key supporters in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and the other early states, but his travel schedule is not burdened by a need to concentrate his time and resources  on rebuilding lists, raising money and rebuilding his reputation.
  1. Pew finds that Romney's fav/unfav ratio is pretty darned good. The same guy who was pegged as a flip-flopper, as a fake (or too real) social conservative, as a guy who said what people wanted to hear... is relatively popular.  Plenty of time has passed, and a very distracting election probably helped.  But Romney did himself many favors as the 2008 presidential campaign wound down. He got out of the race at the right moment, letting arch-enemy Mike Huckabee try and rally the right against John McCain. He became the establishment frontrunner to be McCain's vice presidential selection, and when McCain didn't pick him, he became the '08 ticket's chief economics spokesman (when Carly Fiornia, the former Hewlett-Packard CEO, flamed out.)  He turned over his scheduling to McCain's team, winning goodwill.  He's rehabbed his image fairly successfully.  Some of the old baggage may whip around on the conveyor belt, but there'll be less of it.
  1. He's kept in touch with the right people, including McCain. While it's known that the two former rivals have had dinner since the election, it's not well known that McCain occasionally calls upon Romney for policy advice. As Romney slowly expands his circle, his inner ring advisers remain intact, including every significant member of his Massachusetts gubernatorial staff, his communications team, and many of his consultants. (When Romney visits Washington, D.C., he'll take dinner with ad man Russ Schriefer, with press secretary Kevin Madden, and with former communications director Matt Rhoades, among others.)  Romney inspires loyalty like no other potential 2012 presidential candidate.
  1. He's helping the party. His donor base and personal wealth allow him to be a generous fundraiser for other candidates, campaigning for Republican gubernatorial candidate Chris Christie in New Jersey, Bob McDonnell in Virginia, Meg Whitman in California and his friend Bob Bennet in Utah. (Bennett's already running an ad featuring Romney's endorsement.)
  1. Good Bye To All That.  There's a sense among Romney regulars that the stuff that tripped him up in 2008 will not be relevant if he decides to run in 2012. The number of people who will oppose him because of his faith probably won't grow. He made his rookie mistakes in 2008.


Jun 25 2009, 1:26PM

Clarence Thomas, Outcast? Or President?

Today, the Supreme Court issued its second 8-1 decision with Clarence Thomas providing as the lone dissenting voice. Last week, it was the court's ruling in a case on the Voting Rights Act. Today, the court ruled that Arizona public school officials violated a 13-year-old girl's constitutional rights when they stripped searched her in a search for prescription strength drugs. The majority ruled that, had the search been for illicit drugs or something else that might have cause more imminent harm, then the search might have been justified, but not in a mad search for something like Tylenol. As it happens, no pills were found on the girl. Officials acted on a tip from another student.

More

Jun 25 2009, 12:07PM

U.S. Open Sparks Climate Debate?

"Debate" is, I'm sure, too lofty a word here, but Climate Progress suggests Tiger Woods fell prey to global warming at last weekend's extra rainy U.S. Open; Newsbusters, ever looking to call out climate (or any liberal) hype, thinks this is ridiculous. Personally, I think his putting had more to do with it. But it was downright rainy.

Jun 25 2009, 11:04AM

Jenny Sanford's Statement

Jenny Sanford, the first lady of South Carolina, issued a fairly long, thoughtful statement on the situation. Say what you want about the governor's disappearance and press conference yesterday, both the Sanfords have been particularly open about their situation and what's transpired, an observation that hasn't been lost on those in and outside the media commenting on it. In the statement, Mrs. Sanford says she asked the governor to leave two weeks ago, and that she "believe[s] Mark has earned a chance to resurrect our marriage." Full statement after the jump:

More

Jun 25 2009, 10:27AM

Two Ways To Read An Iranian News Story

With massive amounts of unconfirmed information floating about on Twitter and unsourced, generally unaccredited sites around the Web, it's difficult to contextualize any news we get out of Iran--especially what's coming from its state-run press. Every statement and action can be taken in different ways, and, without a comprehensive picture of what's going on there from reported sources, it's tough to know which way to choose.

With the arrest of 70 professors and this terrifying report from a CNN caller, we can tell things are bad. But with Mousavi's defiance, the opposition could still be thriving in the face of it.

With that in mind, here are two ways to read a story posted yesterday afternoon on Iran's state-run Press TV, with the headline "Leader: Iran not to give in to pressure."

More

Jun 25 2009, 9:41AM

The New Tom Joads

The Wall Street Journal has a great story this morning about people who have become semi-nomad because of the recession. (Subscription required.) Our own Christina Davidson is making her own recession roadtrip. I recently rented an apartment from a former Democratic press secretary, Jill Greenberg, who is riding out the recession in South America, as much for adventure as economic necessity. Makes you think of Tom Joad from The Grapes of Wrath and his famous speech and how it might be written today:

"Wherever there's a foreclosure on a condo, Ma, I'll be there....Wherever there's a banker turned barista, I'll be there...."

Are there political implications to this, the new Okies, the new migration of the economically displaced? Probably not. Most people aren't getting all peripatetic in order to earn a living and so it's not some constituency that needs catering to. On the other hand, it's not impossible that the recession will stir forces that will lead to or exacerbate large scale dislocations. Michigan was emptying out before the recession came. What's it going to be like by the time of the 2020 Census? Our former Atlantic colleague, Nicholas Lemann, has written extensively about the great black migration from South to North in the middle of the last century. In general, recessions haven't been enough to shake already prevalent trends, but they probably speed them up.

The political party that figures out migration patterns is going to have a huge advantage. Obviously, at the moment, the growing Hispanic population and its fanning out far beyond the West and Southwest had been a boon to the Democrats. The party that recognizes that we're all migrants now, or at risk of becoming them, would have a big advantage. Is it any wonder that the always cutting-edge HBO is moving ahead with "Americatown," a series set 25-40 years in the future with struggling American migrants huddled in the shadows of a foreign city. America's always been a mobile society, but the forces roiling the economy are maiming it more so, and it'll be interesting to watch which party gets it first.

Jun 25 2009, 9:12AM

Will Sanford's Sins Change Politics?

Yes They Will:

1. He's the latest in a line of potential GOP presidential candidates to fall victim to his personal appetites. This means that the GOP primary electorate is more likely to choose a nominee with stellar, unimpeachable family-values, socially conservative credentials, which means that anyone who evinces moderation hasn't got a shot. Remember: Rudy Giuliani lost the presidential race because news reminded voters about his previous indiscretions.

2. Gov. Haley Barbour, as the new RGA chair, is the most powerful Republican in politics today, second only, I think, to Mitt Romney. Barbour has always craved a return to the respectable power circles in Washington. The race just lost a real Southerner, ceding to Barbour the GOP's juiciest territory. Watch for Barbour to be more aggressive about his national ambitions. (I'm not saying he WILL run for president, just that he wants to.)

3. The GOP loses one of its most articulate anti-spending, anti-deficit spokespersons. Sanford's machinations may not have been popular, but he articulated a view of the world that many conservatives share. He was to many the face of opposition to President Obama's increasingly unpopular stimulus bill.

4. The topsy-turvy world of South Carolina Republican politics is now even more chaotic, if you can believe that. This may give Democrats a chance to move in that state.

5. The media will have more license to investigate rumors of personal indiscretions, and politicians will be more defensive. A few years ago, the media would ignore the rumors, owing to a post-Clinton detente/public wariness about the private lives of politicians. Not anymore.

6. This may be a tipping point: a few examples of conservative moralists who cheat on their wives (Vitter, Ensign) can be, perhaps, accepted as evidence that human beings are normal. But at some point, the liberal talking point about GOP hypocrisy starts to have the ring of truth, even though plenty of Democrats have been implicated in affairs of their own. Moralizers in politics don't have the clout they once did, and Sanford joins the list of politicians who are responsible. The usual "blame the culture of New York and Washington" line, which was used to explain the indiscretions of the two most recent New York Democratic governors and of Senators Ensign and Vitter, don't apply to Sanford. He was as South Carolinian as all get out.

7. The GOP will find itself distracted at a time when the party needs to be disciplined on health care and energy. Every GOP officeholder will be forced to spend valuable time explaining why their party stands for family values.

No They Won't:

1. As one correspondent put it to me, the GOP is at a market bottom already. The public's image of the party can't really go down much further.

2. Most Americans probably didn't know who Sanford was before today, so it'll hard to attribute any massive change in politics to his sudden emergence.

3. Sanford was never a viable 2012 candidate because of his eccentricity; to put him in the same category as a Mitt Romney or a Sarah Palin misjudges the impact he would have had.

4. What policy will change because of this? It's a fantasy to think that voters will get the joke about how gay people keep ruining straight politician's lives.

5. Enough already. Wars, economic crises, major reform of health care and fiscal policy, Jon and Kate, the Iranian revolution: our collective bandwidth may be at capacity.

6. Logically, Mark Sanford's affair tells us nothing about the rightness or wrongness of policy (although it does hurt the way one particular brand is sold.)

Jun 25 2009, 6:00AM

Sanford's Style

As public admissions/apologies go, Mark Sanford's was remarkably open, perhaps verging on too much information. How does Sanford's press conference stack up to the historical likes of Clinton, Spitzer, and Vitter?

Jun 24 2009, 7:00PM

The Day In Politics, 6/24

Today, we learned that Bill Richardson thought it was "fantastic" to have Manny Ramirez in New Mexico; Mark Sanford returned; held a press conference; said he'd been in Argentina and admitted to an affair; Sarah Palin ranked as America's most popular Republican; the Iranian government leveled allegations of terrorism and spying; and Nico Pitney explained his arranged conveyance of an Iranian question.

More

Jun 24 2009, 6:15PM

Question Of The Day, Answered

Some interesting reader answers to our question of the day, which was, "President Obama expresses undisguised contempt for the habits of the American media. And they luuuuv it. Do his low-grade insults make him irresistible? Who taught him this pop seduction technique?":

More

Multimedia

Jun 24 2009, 5:36PM

Mark Sanford's Press Conference

Video of South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford's press conference Wednesday, in which he explains his disappearance to Argentina and admits an affair.

Jun 24 2009, 5:35PM

The Invisible Primary, 6/24

Tracking the GOP race to 2012

The big news of the day, of course, was Mark Sanford's admission of an affair, commentators commenting that GOP stars are falling, as John Ensign and Sanford made similar admissions in short succession; in related news, Haley Barbour will take over as head of the Republican Governors Association now that Sanfor's stepping down; in non-Sanford-related news, Sarah Palin ranked as the most popular Republican figure in a Pew poll that compared her to three other top partisans (none of them being Mike Huckabee, who addressed the Southern Baptist Pastors Conference this week).

Jun 24 2009, 4:44PM

What Bill Clinton Can Teach Mark Sanford

I made the point earlier that Bill Clinton was famously saved by the perception that he was  undistracted by his affair and the he was still focused on the country's business. The public tended to blame the GOP for the impeachment trial, the circus, the vast distraction that was the Monica Lewinsky affair. And so Clinton survived. My point is that the I'm-getting-back-to-work ethos could save Sanford if his painful press conference didn't already. Interestingly, Sanford didn't stress getting back to work. He mostly stressed the healing that lay ahead. Clinton did that, too but in politician's fashion almost seemed to throw it off to a commission. He announced that he was going to be seeking pastoral counseling--psychiatry or psychology would have been too unsettling for the body politic--and let it go at that. Sanford would probably benefit from the same but with a pronounced emphasis on getting back to work. He shouldn't go to the john without leaving a forwarding number.

(As a side note, it's worth pointing out that Sanford called on Clinton to resign.)

I mentioned GIuliani as another pol who benefitted from this. John Podhoretz wrote to remind me that Rudy went from moving out of Gracie Mansion to battling cancer to abandonning his bid for the U.S. Senate against Hillary Clinton. True. But the sense that he was still a man of action helped preserve his viability for 2008. That and 9/11 24/7.

Jun 24 2009, 4:40PM

Sanford No Longer Featured On Values Voter Summit Site

UPDATE: Sanford was originally invited to speak, but the Family Research Council (which runs the summit) was told last week that Sanford wouldn't be able to attend, according to FRC spokesman J.P. Duffy.

Which indicates Sanford's disappearance from the site is less sudden than it originally appeared, and that his dropping out of the lineup is not a result of today's press conference.


Mark Sanford, formerly featured prominently in the lineup of the 2009 Values Voter summit, to be held in Washington, DC September 18-20, isn't on the list anymore--nor is his picture on the Values Voter Summit website.

Sanford was listed in the lineup on the summit's website before last week; now, after the admission, he isn't.

More

Jun 24 2009, 3:59PM

Will Sanford's Admissions Change Politics?

I'll have more to say about this later, but I think the answer is yes: Once again, Americans have another reason to throw their hands up and say, "There's another politician who couldn't keep it in his pants, and who abused the public trust."  Confidence in political institutions is as low as it was after Watergate, and the less confidence the public has in politicians, the less competitive elections will be; fewer good people decide to run for office, and the cycle perpetuates.  I'm not so sure the ultimate meaning of the revelation has anything to do with moral hypocrisy; the archetype of conservative moral scolds is no longer salient outside GOP primary politics. Imagine if Rudy Giuliani had run in this environment.... 

Jun 24 2009, 3:14PM

We've Got More Questions for Mark Sanford

Mark Sanford's extraordinary press conference leads to a number of questions about what happens next to a governor and former congressman who was once considered one of the brightest stars of the Republican party. It was a deeply embarrassing and painful moment and one that seemed to answer all of the questions that have been looming. But there are still others:

1. Will pressure grow on him to resign the governorship? Sanford said he'd quit as chair of the Republican Governors Association but will pressure gather from South Carolinians, the state's Republicans and editorial pages for him to quit his office? And if so what's the case against Sanford: Leaving town without telling anyone?

More

Jun 24 2009, 3:05PM

Nico Pitney Explains His Question

There's been a thread of discussion today about the question asked yesterday by The Huffington Post's Nico Pitney at President Obama's midday news conference. It was provided by an Iranian and asked by Pitney in person, after the White House heard Pitney was soliciting such a question from Iranians and called him to say they wanted him to ask one at the press conference. Some have said that this was too much stagecraft by the White House--orchestrating or even planting a question ahead of time (it was, however, clear that Obama knew it was coming as he looked at Pitney and said he understood he had a question ready to go from an Iranian). Pitney's question was a fairly challenging one. It was: "Under which conditions would you accept the election of Ahmadinejad, and if you do accept it without any significant changes in the conditions there, isn't that a betrayal of what the demonstrators there are working toward?"

This morning, Pitney called into C-SPAN's Washington Journal and explained the question and how he got it, and how he orchestrated its delivery with the White House.

More

Jun 24 2009, 2:24PM

Mark Sanford Reveals Affair, Cover-Up

A curated stream of information and tweets...

Sen. Lindsay Graham, in a statement: ""As for the future, I hope Mark will reconcile with his family and can continue serving as our state's governor."

http://www.scstatehouse.gov/CODE/t16c015.htm  South Carolina's Code of Laws, Title 16--Crimes and Offenses, Chapter 15 "Offenses Against Morality and Decency"

@AriMelber Why Sanford was so bad at being discreet? Typical sense of entitlement&arrogance. He'd have made it w/o that journo at airport.

@ATLNewsBrew: "SC Gov Haiku: Sanford Goes Down South / Divorce Soon Leaves Him Empty/ Wife Gets Hilton Head!

@ragley @laurinmanning: impeachment gets the state nothing. The man is ruined. What more can the liberals do to him

@dmataconis: Sanford was one Republican I could have supported in 2012. Who's left ? Romney, Huckabee, and Palin a/k/a Los Tres Losers

@AndrewSullivan said it best:, "But it's important to remember at these moments that we're all human. I just wish the GOP leadership would apply that lesson to everyone else."

@laurinmanning: Pray for Jenny and the four boys. Pray for Mark. Pray for those whose hearts are heavy with disappointment. Pray for South Carolina. #tcot

@ktumulty Fmr. DNC and SC Dem Chair Don Fowler explains how Mark Sanford has helped reverse the old rule of political scandal: http://bit.ly/4PKef

Spartanburg sounds off over Sanford affair: http://ping.fm/rTFSh 

dbardallis Mark Sanford: Another "who cares?" story. Yay 21st-century big-media-driven public discourse!

Law Dork: New Definition of "Stimulus Funds"?Sanford traveled to Argentina on public's dime. http://tr.im/pD4X

Ensign, now Sanfordhttp://tinyurl.com/mkov32 . Who's going to implode themselves next-Who's left? Heard Dole is ready to avenge 1996.

@markosm: Every  [REDACTED] time. Not an accident. RT@murshedzaheed On Fox: Mark Sanford "(D)" holds press conference http://bit.ly/yCZaz

@attackerman: "@JamilSmith, you think? Sanford *really* sounded like he loves his mistress. is it so crazy he'd go in person?

@gotchamedia  "full video of crazy Mark Sanford press conference:http://bit.ly/3pOTh"

@nprnews A Gov. Mark Sanford 'Disappearance' Timelinehttp://tinyurl.com/l9ztaf

@thehotline: NY Daily News with best Sanford headline so far: "Sanford And Someone?" http://bit.ly/39ApFq

@dailykos if Mark Sanford had just resigned last wk he wouldn't have needed to humiliate his family. Shows you where his priorities are.

@manoleasa: "June has not been very kind to the GOP, has it? Wonder who's next! Do they have anybody else standing?

@stardragonca "Sanford, please. Stormfronts evolve. Viruses evolve. this is something that you DID!"

@murphymikeSanford bombshell. Very sad to watch; I know Mark and Jenny and like them both a lot. 

@laurinmanning "#sanford apologized to @senatortomdavis about 14 more times than he did his wife and kids. Weird."

@half_Street:  "Hard not to feel compassion for Sanford, but he's only being somewhat "open and transparent" b/c he has nowhere left to hide."

Press conference ends with his staff literally dragging him away.

Confesses affair / Resigns from RGA / Says wife and family knew about affair for "about the last five months." / Says that his mistress was separated at the time / Affair began via e-mail / Has Seen Her Three Times /  "Spent the last five days of my life crying in Argentina." 

He's been as open as I've ever seen a politician be under these circumstances. 

So... this was Associative Fugue, Rather than Dissociative Figure. 
Sanford: "There are moral absolutes. ... There are consequences if you breach that. This press conference is a consequence. The bottom line is this: I've been unfaithful to my wife. I developed a relationship with ... a dear, dear friend from Argentina. It began"very innocently...as many of these things do...over last year, it developed into something much more than that. I hurt her, I hurt you all, I hurt my boys...

@mattiscooper "Ouch. Here comes @marksanford 's wife-free "bottom line."

@mattizcooper "God's law?" Eeek. Backdrop of smiling interns and photographers adds to weirdness...

If you were to look at God's law, in every instance, they were designed to protect people from themselves. Not a  "moral rigid list of dos and don't."  Apologies to "people of faith."

This seems like an elegy to his career.  Even though we don't know what the lede of the story is yet. This is uncomfortable to watch.

Apologies to staff, wife and children... says he created "fiction" in regard to where I was going. Apologies to people of SC for letting them down. Apologizes to his parents, who are staying with his wife. Says he "laid some cards on the table" a few weeks ago. 

Sanford: "It's gonna hurt." Apologizes to wife and children for "letting them down."

@mattizcoop: Okay, this is already rambling and weird with a walk down memory lane from @marksanford.

More

Jun 24 2009, 1:55PM

Don't Cry For Me, Mark Sanford

Will be Twittering the Mark Sanford press conference at 2 PM Eastern. In the mean time, interesting reading can be done here on the Politics Channel and by my colleagues at Talkingpointsmemo.com who are using theiir crowdsourcing to solicit interesting reader comments on why it's suspect you would want to drive the Argentine coast this time of year.

Kind of wondering when we'll get reaction from the likes of Jim DeMint, Lindsey Graham and Sanford's pal, John McCain. Sanford was a McCain 2000 supporter and the two have long been close. Plus Sanford is still chair of the Republican Governors Association. Is there going to be any rumbling there to dislodge him? And if so, why? Of course, will be wondering whether Mrs. Sanford is by his side at the press conference.


Jun 24 2009, 1:51PM

State-Run Headline: "Iran uncovers plots in presidential election"

That's a top headline from Iran's state-run Press TV today (story here). "The Zionist and non-Zionist regimes outside the county" were responsible for plots, Iranian Intelligence Minister Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejei said, reporting that two "terrorist" groups have been seized by police. He also claimed terrorists planned a bombing at a shrine of Ayatollah Khomeini. And the specter of foreign spies was raised:
According to the intelligence minister, the US and some western countries were aiming to achieve unrest in Iran's elections atmosphere.

When asked by a reporter about the arrest of foreign spies working under the guise of reporters, Mohseni-Ejei said, "Anybody who embarks on espionage activity in the country will be arrested. A foreign reporter has so far been nabbed and another one has been questioned and his things were confiscated."

Jun 24 2009, 12:53PM

Sarah Palin: America's Top Republican

Sarah Palin is the most popular (though most divisive) of the top GOP figures in the land, according to a new poll from Pew, which compared her to Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, and Michael Steele. This, of course, leaves out some other important GOP figures--most notably Mike Huckabee, whose strong showing in the 2008 GOP primary and continued presence on Fox News places him in the well-known category along with those four.

This comes after a June 2 CNN poll showed no clear frontrunner in the 2012 primary race, with Huckabee slightly ahead of the pack.

More

Jun 24 2009, 12:24PM

Tweeting The Sanford South America Fugue

It's not a revolution in Iran, exactly, but...if it consumes the political world, we're gonna cover it.

@pandagon: Argentinian Pres. Cristina Fernández de Kirchner has disappeared. Staff says she's in Curacao, may actually be in Camden, NJ.


@DanaHoule: Sad. Becoming better traveled than George W Bush was before he was elected cost Sanford a shot at the presidency.

@SteveHaweeli Oh take me with you!!! #Sanford

@cwillk SC residents, its pretty clear Sanford was tracking down Carmen Sandiego, a known terrorist. You should be thrilled to have a gumshoe gov

@cn2news They say Scotty is dead, then how did he beam Sanford up from the AT, to Atlanta and then Buenos Aires?! Scotty Lives!!

@mdubno So #Sanford was told by his chief of staff to come home from #Argentina. Then staff continued to lie about whereabouts.

@surtsidegraphic Governor Sanford disappears to Argentina...Now the WSJ is reporting that the Argentinian peso dropped 'significantly' on Tues, I smell fish.

@GregMitch:S. Carolina paper that broke Sanford story, wonders where he was really "cruising."For bruising? http://bit.ly/8Byjl

@notellinuzip Hot news - Mark Sanford changes first name to Waldo and orders the retraction of all K-12 geography classes in SC

Jun 24 2009, 11:46AM

Quote Of The Day: Nixon On Looking For More Female Candidates

Understand, I don't do it because I'm for women, but I'm doing it because I think maybe a woman might win someplace where a man might not.

Jun 24 2009, 11:30AM

The Crucifixion of Nico Pitney

Okay, that's a bit of an exaggeration but the Huffington Post reporter is getting tweaked this morning for the question he posed to President Obama at yesterday's White House Press Conference. It was an odd moment because normally, of course, reporters raise their hands, the president calls on someone and they ask their question. In this case the president seemed to have Pitney in mind already.

More

Jun 24 2009, 10:35AM

A Public Plan Might Not Be The Panacea...

Would any public plan really force insurance companies out of business? Would it burden the government with significant new financial obligations? Is "public plan" really just a cover phrase for "single payer in 10 years?" This is a complex debate, but Congress is certainly capable of crafting a public plan that doesn't compete very well in the marketplace. Indeed, health reform advocates can make the case that a weaker public plan might be preferable to a stronger one. That sounds counterintuitive, but it's not. One reason why the Democrats refer to a government-run option as a "public plan" is that it's more easily swallowed that calling it a "government plan." That's the first knock against it. Advantage: private insurance. Then you've got to have faith that the Democrats can design a plan that would be attractive to people. Maybe they will. But if they're keen on putting the plan under the supervision of, say, a bipartisan team of well-meaning health care experts, they might produce a clunker. The private health insurers have advertisers and marketers and decades of experience selling their plans; the government has no comparable experience, and an expert-run plan might not be salable enough. Potential advantage: private insurance. Three: will a government plan require doctors to participate? That's the big concern of the American Medical Association. Let's assume that it won't. That means that, so far as one's choice of doctors is a value, you're likely to decide to perhaps pay a little more to preserve that choice. Potential advantage: private health insurers.

More

Jun 24 2009, 10:33AM

Sanford To Speak, 2pm ET

Gov. Mark Sanford, tanned and rested, will speak to the press at a 2:00 pm ET news conference in Columbia.  If you could ask him one question, what would it be?


Jun 24 2009, 10:01AM

Sanford Emerges

Mark Sanford is back! And the weird tale of a disappearing governor has ended. The South Carolina governor was in Buenos Aires, he said, greeted by a reporter for The State (SC newspaper) in the Atlanta airport this morning.

Hearing him talk about it, he sounds...blase. Some gems from The State's story:
Sanford said he had considered hiking on the Appalachian Trail, an activity he said he has enjoyed since he was a high school student.

"But I said 'no' I wanted to do something exotic," Sanford said "... It's a great city."
And:
"I don't know how this thing got blown out of proportion," Sanford said.

Sanford said he has taken adventure trips for years to unwind. He has visited such places as the coast of Turkey, the Greek Isles and South America. He was with friends sometimes and sometimes by himself.

"I would get out of the bubble I am in." Sanford said.

More

Jun 24 2009, 9:43AM

How Far They've Fallen

If you're a baseball fan, then you know that steroid-pumping quitter Manny Ramirez returned last night from a 50-game suspension, imposed for testing positive for drugs associated with a performance-enhancing cycle. Actually, Manny has not completed his suspension, but the rules allow him to begin his comeback in the minor leagues, so he suited up with the Dodgers' Triple-A affiliate, the Albuquerque Isotopes (not to be confused with the Springfield Isotopes). The Ramirez steroids scandal is the biggest in pro sports this year. But on SportsCenter last night, there was a moment of politico-athletic scandal serendipity when it was reported that one-time Obama Commerce Secretary nominee Bill Richardson, who withdrew amid an ethics scandal, attended the game and pronounced Manny's joining the Isotopes "a fantastic day for New Mexico"...the circumstances of this "fantastic" turn of events being, let's remember, the entirely just punishment of an epic cheat who has forever tarnished baseball. Nice going, Bill! Ramirez went 0-for-2 with a strikeout. But on balance, I think Richardson proved himself the bigger sad sack.

UPDATE: A spokesman for Richardson e-mails to say that SportsCenter was wrong--Richardson never said it was a "fantastic day" for New Mexico. Richardson was at the game, but he didn't make any such comment, the spokesman said.

Jun 24 2009, 6:00AM

Obama The Pickup Artist

President Obama expresses undisguised contempt for the habits of the American media. And they luuuuv it. Do his low-grade insults make him irresistible? Who taught him this pop seduction technique?

Jun 23 2009, 11:03PM

Sanford Files: His Car Is Found

Item: the governor's armored SUV is found in the parking lot of the Columbia, SC airport. A sleeping bag is inside. (H/T, Peter Hamby.)

Item: Numerous media outlets cite a "federal agent" who saw Sanford at an airport in Atlanta, which matches a report that his cell phone was last tracked on a cell tower in Atlanta. (Fact hidden in that sentence: some law enforcement entity was worried enough to convince the cell phone company to part with its cell data.)

Item: His staff provides conflicting information about whether his cell phone was turned off, and on, and whether he gave anyone a detailed description of his itinerary.

Item: He's back in Columbia tomorrow, so... we'll know. 

Jun 23 2009, 7:30PM

The Day In Politics, 6/23

Today, we learned that the Obama administration is shutting down a domestic satellite surveillance program; Iran's Guardian Council says it won't annul the election results; a cheat site can help you understand health reform; health insurers are feeling the public drumbeat for a public plan; and President Obama held a news conference covering Iran, health care reform, and energy.

More

Jun 23 2009, 6:50PM

The Invisible Primary, 6/23

Tracking the GOP race to 2012

Potential 2012 hopefuls will attend the Values Voter Summer in DC Sept. 18-20--the lineup includes Eric Cantor, Mike Huckabee, Bobby Jindal, Sarah Palin, Tim Pawlenty, Rick Perry, Mike Pence, and Mitt Romney; Haley Barbour dined with some senior GOP strategysts in DC Monday night; he held a press conference with GOP lawmakers today and said he'll "probably never" announce he's running for president; John Ensign apologized for his affair privately in a meeting with GOP senators; and he accused a former senior aide--the wife of the staffer with whom he had the affair--of extortion.

Jun 23 2009, 5:45PM

Why Are Obama's Polls Slipping?

Today's presidential press conference was supposed to be held in the Rose Garden, but it got canceled because of the heat. I suspect this was less a tender concern about the press corps, which would have to be seated long in advance of the president, and not wanting the president to sweat and drip on camera.

Obama's poll numbers have been going down, although they remain high. Why are they going down? A lot of it seems to have to do with spending and government intervention in the economy, which has roused fears of independents. 70 percent of respondents in the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll said that they were concerned "a great deal" or "quite a bit" about the GM takeover.

I have a slightly different spin on this, which is that it's the spending and the modest success it seems to have brought in stopping the total collapse of the banking and financial system. If the economy felt like it was in the same free fall that it was a few months ago, he'd be doing better because there'd be less questioning of government spending and more calls to pour everything on the fire. But with the respite in the fall comes the freedom to question spending. Or, to put it another way: The firemen saved your house but now you're pissed off about all the water damage in the den.

That applies to Ben Bernanke, who raised questions about the deficit in his last testimony before Congress, and its true of the public. It's a paradox: If things were worse, Obama would be doing better. At this point, more economic decline isn't going to help Obama. More green shoots will, or passing health care reform or a good foreign policy showdown.

Jun 23 2009, 5:25PM

Voting Rights, Afterthoughts

My old colleague and friend, Abigail Thernstrom, makes the case against minority-majority districts in the National Review.  The Nation reverts to paleoliberal stereotype in its piece on the Supreme Court's temperate 8-1 decision on an Austin, Texas utility district. The New York Times is also worried. Please. Does the Times believe that Steven Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, John Paul Stevens and David Souter have taken a crazy shift to the right? The decision seemed decidedly temperate, to me anyway. Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act is a serious infringement on local power and prerogatives but rightfully so given the country's history of racial discrimination. The question of whether it remains constitutional is a serious one. For the left and right, it seems like a no brainer but the Court seems to be taking a centrist position that this is a tough question without an easy answer. I found that pretty reassuring even if, I think, there's a coming showdown over this issue that won't be so temperate.

More

Jun 23 2009, 4:27PM

Unlocking Obama's Mind On Health Care

I want to pose two questions about President Obama, the White House, and health care. I don't know the answers.

First, would Obama veto a non-deficit neutral bill if that bill (a) provided insurance for everyone and (b) included other, longer-term cost-cutting measures?  

Second -- was Obama's tactical flexibility on a public plan because he 

(a) isn't convinced that the votes exists for the type of a public plan that would really reorient the health care marketplace?

(b) knows that a plan without a public option would never get to his desk but doesn't want to tip his hand?

Jun 23 2009, 4:07PM

The Atlantic's Boldest: Department Of Corrections

1. Former RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie did not poll for John McCain during the '08 election.

2. The GOP-aligned Resurgent Republic is not a firm, but rather a non-profit group in the mold of the Dem-aligned Democracy Corps.

3. Jonathan Cohn is a health care policy expert. Jonathan Chait is a valued Cohn colleague at The New Republic. They are not the same person. 

Jun 23 2009, 3:52PM

Mousavi And Mossadeq: What The 1953 U.S.-Backed Overthrow Has To Do With Today

In the middle of the last century, the U.S. overthrew Iran's democratically elected leader, Muhammad Mossadeq. Some think it happened too long ago to be a major factor in today's protests; some disagree. But it's shaping how both the Iranian and U.S. governments react to what's happening in the streets of Tehran.

Accusations of U.S. interference have been rampant in the past weeks as the Iranian government plays on history and old fears. Even before the June 12 election took place, Iran's main state-run newspaper warned that Western interference in the election was likely; since then, warnings and accusations of intervention have been steady; today, Iran's foreign ministry accused the U.N. of interfering in its affairs.

More

Jun 23 2009, 3:33PM

Quote of the Day: Obama on Neda Video

It's heartbreaking. Anybody who sees it knows that there is something fundamentally unjust about that.

Jun 23 2009, 3:27PM

Obama's Weird "AA" Crack

It tells you something that neither Afghanistan nor Iraq came up at the president's press conference. The United States is simultaneously prosecuting two wars in the Muslim world and neither merited a question of the president. It's the surest sign of how quickly attention shifts and flits from one topic to another and how surefooted the White House needs to be in a fluid news environment. Iran might have gotten one question a few weeks ago. Now it dominates the news conference. The collapse of the American automotive industry didn't come up either, nor did rail safety after yesterday's accident or hate crimes, which so dominated the news cycle after the shooting at the Holocaust Memorial. Nothing lasts.

More

Jun 23 2009, 3:07PM

Sanford's Disapperance: He's Just A Weird Guy

Let us presume that Gov. Mark Sanford (R-SC) will indeed return to work today, safe and sound, fresh from a long hike along the Appalachian trial, and that the state government figures out why so much misinformation about the circumstances surrounding his absence was spread.  That still leaves us with the question: what's with this guy?

More

Jun 23 2009, 1:52PM

Did Obama Change His Position On Iran?

Did President Obama change his mind about intervening in Iran's election? With the words that he used: no,  With the tone,setting, context, maybe. But he had no choice.

1. His statement referred to the Islamic Republican of Iran, which remains this administration's way of signaling that they acknowledge the legitimacy of the current government.

2. He reiterated the U.S. opposition to regime change and its support for Iranian sovereignty.

3. As he's done since the beginning of the crisis, he said that Iran -- and Iran only -- would decide Iran's future.

4. If the Iranian government were to respond to the administraiton's offer for direct talks today, the administration would engage in direct talks with the government.

The administration believes that there is a line, perhaps a red line, between supporting the aspirations of the demonstrators, expressing sympathy for their plight, expressing (key word) universally recognized outrage at the bloodshed, reiterating his belief that, even as American democracy isn't directly exportable everywhere, Islamic governments must recognize certain core human values that the current government isn't recognizing.  

More

Jun 23 2009, 1:25PM

The Four Keys To Obama's Mind

Based on the 53 minutes and answers to 15 question, here's where President Obama's mind seems to be at:

1.  Obviously, he wanted to send a direct message to Iranian people without intervening. (Non-intervening interventionalism.)  He is still not willing to say that the election was illegitimate. He is still willing to talk to this regime, but he didn't say who that regime included. (Strategic ambiguity.)   I think the key to understanding where he's at on Iran now: ""We don't know yet how this thing is going to play out. I know everybody here is on a 24 hour news cycle. I'm not."   The soundbite will be the response to the Neda murder video. That's what the world -- and the Iranian protesters -- will hear.
 
2. He said the top priority for health care reform is cutting costs. During the campaign, it was about universal coverage, which is now his number two priority.  The change reflects current political realities, as well as Obama's evolving understanding of what real reform would mean. The personal stories he hears still touch him, as he made clear.  He refuses to say (at least at this point) that he would veto a health care plan without a "public plan" option.  He did, however, give his strongest defense of that concept to date. Seems to me that he supports a public plan option but will not insist on one. And his message to Congress about costs couldn't be more clear: the CBO had better score your final proposals as deficit-neutral. 

More

Jun 23 2009, 12:34PM

Obama's News Conference In Short Tweet Bursts

Q15: Neda video: "It's heartbreaking. Anybody who sees it knows that there is something fundamentally unjust about that."

Q14: Af-Am unemp. rate up to 14%, Romer on targeted intervention next year:  O:  "Lift everyone."

Q13: O on second stimulus package: "Not yet."  Reiterates my blog post yesterday on economic predictions. (Not really. Well, maybe.) 

Fourth media-meta-comment. Talks about timeframes and crystal balls. Key line: "In the absence of the stimulus, it would be much worse."

Q12:  Colombia policy: O gives complex answer on subject I haven't had the time to read about. Sorry.

Q 11: Obama's smoking habits.  Obama admits falling off the wagon. Not in front of kids or family. 95% cured.... times where "I mess up."

That's three meta-comments about the press now.

Q10: Obama: the government is not going to make you change plans under health reform... but if employers are forced / decide to change plans...

Key political point: Obama says that if there's no reform, then people could lose more choice...

More

Jun 23 2009, 12:29PM

Iranian Diplomats At 4th Of July Parties: Subterfuge?

There's a debate going on right now about whether or not the Obama administration should disinvite Iranian diplomats from its 4th of July embassy barbecues. The Plank's Jason Zengerle offers a creatively skulduggerous justification for why the administration shouldn't rescind the invites: maybe it will help us gather intelligence.

Jun 23 2009, 12:26PM

Health Insurers Feel The Public Plan Drumbeat

How quickly one's perception of public opinion transforgifies!  Last week, the public plan seemed to be, well, dead. (It wasn't, but that was the perception.) 

The two associations representing health insurance plans that cover 200 million Americans are now reminding members of Congress that they oppose adding a government option to the health care reform bills in Congress.  The Association of Health Insurance Plans and Blue Cross Blue Shield contend that a government-run plan -- "no matter how it is initially structured" -- would "dismantle employer-based coverage, significantly increase costs for those who remain in private coverage, and add additional liabilities for those who remain in private coverage."  

"Recognizing the substantial disruption to consumers and health care providers that a government plan based on Medicare would create, some policymakers are looking at alternatives that would attempt to achieve a level playing field," the industry's lobbyists writes. "We do not believe that it is possible to create a government plan that could operate on a level playing field."

The associations released their letter on the morning that President Obama uses the presidential pulpit to urge Congress to continue its work.

Jun 23 2009, 11:29AM

Useful Health Reform Cheat Site

We can't all have the steel trap minds of Ezra Klein and Jonathan Cohn, much less of Henry Aaron, Ken Thorpe or Peter Orszag. For the rest of us, Kaiser has put together a side-by-side comparison of the nine (or so) versions of health care reform legislation in Congress. 

Jun 23 2009, 10:34AM

Guardian Council Decides Tomorrow; Has Said It Won't Annul Vote

Iran's Guardian Council will announce its final decision Wednesday on allegations that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's June 12 election victory was rigged, the Tehran Times reports. It has already been reported that the Council has ruled out annulling the results, so this final decision might not offer much hope to Iran's protesters; neither, probably, will this explanation from the Council's spokesman of why more votes were recorded there were eligible voters in at least 50 districts:
In response to the complaints that the number of votes in some provinces exceeded the number of eligible voters, Kadkhodaii explained that this occurred because there is no law requiring people to vote in their place of residence and people can vote anywhere in the country. 

Jun 23 2009, 9:19AM

An Advance For Privacy

The Obama administration has decided to shut down the National Applications Office at the Department of Homeland Security, which allowed federal law enforcement agencies access to Defense Department satellites for surveillance and other domestic law enforcement activities. Now, only FEMA and the Department of Interior will get access to the imagery, and only for emergencies and routine mapping purposes. 

Jun 23 2009, 6:00AM

Internet Surveillance And Iran: A Primer

If you're not an expert in Internet surveillance, and you've been following the Iranian protests, this post is for you.

It's widely recognized that Iran employs systems of Internet restriction and monitoring to keep its people from engaging in activities it deems subversive, and much has been made of that restriction (recently in a Wall Street Journal story on the communications network sold to Iran by Siemens and Nokia--a story later refuted by the companies). With so much information coming to us from Iran via YouTube and Twitter, and yet all the talk of monitoring, there's a fundamental discrepancy in the discussion: if Iran puts so much effort into monitoring its citizens, how come we keep seeing cell phone videos of protests and violence; how is so much information coming to us via Twitter?

And, more broadly, how does Internet surveillance work? How can the government restrict, monitor, or find you if you're doing something illegal/subversive?

More

Jun 22 2009, 7:30PM

The Day In Politics, 6/22

Today, Nokia and Siemens defended their contract to provide communications (along with filtering mechanisms) to Iran; the Supreme Court upheld Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act; Gov. Mark Sanford is missing, though his staff says he's taking some R and R; and two Metro trains collided in DC.

More

Jun 22 2009, 6:57PM

Useful Political Tweets Of The Day, 6/22

Everyday, I, @marcambinder, follow 1,400 of the most interesting tweeps in the universe so you don't have to. 

NeimanLab
(@niemanlab) A lesson in aggregation: How @robinsloan created his "Iran election tracker for the easily overwhelmed" http://tr.im/plpU

Clement Tan (@clemtan) AOL PoliticsDaily site surpasses Politico in terms of unique site hits in May, but can the site keep it up? http://bit.ly/3ODYh

Ryan Nobles (@ryannobles) Haley Barbour goes back in time. Why he is comparing 2009 to 1993 and why it is a good thing for @BobMcDonnell- http://decisionvirginia.com

James Bennet (@jbennet) Rohde escape reminds: W/ the US in 2 wars, the NYT has built the strongest team of war correspondents in a generation.

Adam Schroeder  (@staytuspro) This is a scary story. RT @ newscientist: Best brug to combat malaria is threatened by the appearance of resistance.  http://bit.ly/15E0NW

Lawrence Lessig (@lessig Fantastic 538.com study about effect of $$ on public option for healthcare: http://bit.ly/e6WnB

Jun 22 2009, 6:40PM

The Invisible Primary, 6/22

Tracking the GOP race to 2012

Gov. Mark Sanford has gone missing, and his staff won't say where he is; John Ensign's approval ratings dropped after admitting to an affair with an ex-staffer, but he is still more popular than Harry Reid; Mike Huckabee will travel to Alabama tomorrow to raise money for a congressional candidate; he'll also keynote an event for radio trade publication Radio Ink in December; and Haley Barbour will travel to Virginia, New Hampshire, and Iowa this week for candidate and party events.

Jun 22 2009, 5:50PM

Metro Train Collision In Washington, D.C.

We're a bit of a DC-centric site, and I'm following the news closely on Twitter, so direct your browser here for more information. 

Jun 22 2009, 5:39PM

The Coming Voting Rights Explosion

Having read the opinion in the voting rights case, I got a little bit of the feeling I did after the Israel-Hezbollah war of 2006. It ended unsatisfactorily for both sides and they're going to be at it again sometime. With a lot more cluster bombs and hostage taking.

Despite the bonhomie of the 8-1 opinion and even Clarence Thomas's dissent--all sides genuflected toward the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and all that it had done for the country--you got the sense that the inevitable showdown is coming: Eventually some jurisdiction is going to have a really good case for getting out from under the act and the Supreme Court is going to have to rule on why an emergency provision that was supposed to last just five years has now been extended to 2031.

More

Jun 22 2009, 3:59PM

Just Asking....

courtesy of a reader:

Why does the president keep making jokes about being in gay relationships with other straight men?  (cf. Brian Williams joke, David Axelrod joke).  It would be funnier if he had, you know, not been stonewalling on gay rights.  Plus the jokes are weirdly aggressive... "I'm the alpha dog so I can make jokes about being gay, therefore you, the counterparty to the joke, are really the butt of it."  Strange/gross.

Jun 22 2009, 3:36PM

Where Is Gov. Mark Sanford?

Not on a particular question of policy... but, as in, where is he, physically? South Carolina's press corps is in a meltdown today because it appears as if the governor skedaddled out of town in a black SUV on Thursday and hasn't been seen since. His cell phone was traced to a tower in Atlanta. His wife says she's not worried. His staff says he's taking some R and R but won't say where. There appears to be some confusion as to whether Sanford's state police security detail knows -- or is looking for him. And why wouldn't he tell his wife? I've heard stories of his personal libertarianism, but that's a little much.

Jun 22 2009, 3:00PM

When Will It Turn?

I detect among some Democrats in Washington a palpable unease about the direction of the U.S. economy, and about the unemployment rate in particular. Notwithstanding hindsight bias, it is fair to say that the decline in the rate of the growth of the unemployment rate -- read that carefully a few times -- isn't responding as well as some Democrats had hoped to the $800 billion stimulus package that was sold as a jobs creator.

More

Jun 22 2009, 2:28PM

Mousavi's Altered Meaning

Fareed Zakaria makes a good point about Mir Hossein Mousavi's relationship to the Iranian protests in a piece in the upcoming issue of Newsweek--namely that a victory for Mousavi would mean something far different now, after the protests and turmoil and bloodshed, than it would have on June 12:

More

Jun 22 2009, 2:05PM

More On Section Five: Congress On The Clock

Conventional wisdom about the ramifications of this morning's Supreme Court decision on the voting rights act has swung from relief to concern. The Court upheld the statute, but they seem to have also, laid the pretext for the statute's demise, and soon, according to astute Court watcher and litigator Tom Goldstein

Though the Supreme Court by a wide margin today formally declined to resolve a challenge to the constitutionality of Section 5, the reality is far different.  The decision unambiguously served notice that the Justices are prepared to invalidate the statute as it stands.  Congress is now effectively on the clock:  it has the period between now and the date that it decides a follow-on challenge by a covered jurisdiction that is not permitted to "bail out" of the statutory scheme to amend Section 5.  If the statute remains the same by the time the next case arrives, the Court will invalidate the statute.

As Goldstein notes, it's up to Congress to revise -- i.e., narrow -- the statute to account for the evolution in race relations and government election processes -- or else the Court will do it for them.

Jun 22 2009, 1:41PM

Provocation Of The Day: Iran's Opposition Elites Are Manipulating The Protestors

In a Financial Times article, reporters Najmeh Bozorgmehr and Roula Khalaf tease out evidence that what some analysts have likened to a clerical-state bureaucracy elite are deftly manipulating the legitimate popular outrage against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's regime as a way of hoisting themselves (back) to power. 

A political party affiliated with Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani, the former president and key member of the Iranian regime, on Sunday called on Mir-Hossein Moussavi, the opposition leader, to form a "political bloc" that would pursue a long-term campaign to undermine the "illegitimate" government.

Where the West sees the pictures and the blood and the green, the Iranian elite sees a contest for the spoils of power. There is no, as of yet, liberal political movement that can be extricated from the desires of a self-interested and powerful, conservative Islamic elite, one that might be, at most, slightly more congenial to American interests, and use less inflammatory rhetoric to prick the consciousness of Western minds. The uprising has appropriated the symbols, gestures and techniques of Western revolutions, but we still know so little about what type of Iranian state these people want. (As Mousavi himself has suggested, the goal isn't to disarm the state-sponsored paramilitaries. It's to co-opt them on the side of the real revolutionaries.)

There is immense disatisfaction among the Iranian people at the current state of affairs. The people are suffering and protesting about it. The United States political elite and the protesters in Iran share a common enemy: Ahmadinejad. They might not share a common future.

Jun 22 2009, 1:01PM

Siemens/Nokia Denies Being Iran's Enabler

Ben Roome, a spokesman for the joint Siemens/Nokia project that supplied Iran with a national mobile telephone system, is blasting back at media reports suggesting that the companies gave Iran the capacity to monitor the source and location of e-mail traffic. Not so, he says. With appropriate reference to international law, Roome says that the technology allowed the company to monitor telephones, but that the contract had nothing to do with web censoring. "Nokia Siemens has not provided any deep packet inspection, web censorship, or Internet filtering capability to Iran."

Jun 22 2009, 12:52PM

Health Care 2009 = Social Security 2005?

The prevailing concern among liberals is that health care reform in 2008 will follow in the footsteps of the 1993 debacle. This is a legitimate concern, and health care reformists would be wise to draw lessons from the Clintons' failure, but we don't need to reach back the 1990s for allusions to failed entitlement reform. Beleaguered Republicans could always sink health reform the way beleaguered 2005 Democrats torpedoed Social Security privatization: Paint the other side as radical conspirators against America.


George Will's Sunday column -- entitled We Don't Need Radical Health Care Reform -- accuses the Obama adminstration of coyly presenting a public "option" that will presage a universal public "system," a single-payer health apparatus entirely run the by the government. Obama's policies are far too ambitious given the problem of uninsured Americans, Will says, which could easily be solved with tax credits. In other words, for the most part, we should practically do nothing.

Will is right, for sure, that cutting a check to millions of Americans is a lot more politically feasible than trying dramatically change the landscape of private health care. And if you reach back one presidential term, the idea that a first-year attempt at entitlement reform threatens to change America for the worse sounds quite familiar.  Here's Paul Krugman's 2004 op-ed on the Bush administration's attempts to walk Social Security toward privatization.

Privatizing Social Security - replacing the current system, in whole or in part, with personal investment accounts - won't do anything to strengthen the system's finances. If anything, it will make things worse ... But since the politics of privatization depend on convincing the public that there is a Social Security crisis, the privatizers have done their best to invent one.


[Privatizers] come to bury Social Security, not to save it. They aren't sincerely concerned about the possibility that the system will someday fail; they're disturbed by the system's historic success ... And that's why the right wants to destroy it.

The elements are all there. Krugman then (like Will now) railed against a radical plan to give an entitlement system a facelift and beat the conspiracy drum to alert readers that the government was't being honest about their plans. In both cases, opponents argued that* dramatic entitlement reform wasn't necessary, but it was a microcosm of the perverse ideology that ruled the White House and sought to change the face of America forever.

Of couse, even if history echoes it doesn't exactly repeat itself. Social Security reform in 2005 was always a battle against public opinion. But as this NYT poll demonstrates, the public is far more willing to reform health care in 2009.

public health plan.png
*Updated: Over at the Washington Monthly, Steve Benen takes me to task for saying that health care reform is just as unnecessary today as Social Security reform was in 2005. The thing is, I never meant to say that! And when I did, I was paraphrasing George Will. I did mean to say that the arguments against today's health care reform are remarkably similar to the arguments against Social Security reform, for all the reasons I state above. That's not to say the need for reform is equivalent at all -- only that the opposing arguments are similar, with Republicans now playing the role of spoiler. Just to be clear. Thanks Steve.

More

Jun 22 2009, 12:25PM

Health Care Opposition: Talk About Costs

Spin might be too harsh a word for it, but the GOP-aligned polling group Resurgent Republic has released a polling memo on health care strategy--i.e., what most concerns Americans, backed up with polling data, and what opponents to Obama's plan should talk about (whatever Obama's plan, specifically, ends up being).

One interesting nugget: the arguments against President Clinton's health care reform plan won't work again today, and this time around it's mostly about cost. The firm writes:

More

Jun 22 2009, 12:03PM

Voting Rights For Our Time

Will have more later on the Roberts Court opinion on the Voting Rights Act. I guess a few things struck me after seeing the initial ruling.

1. You had to be impressed that the Chief Justice got an 8-1 ruling on this issue. Of course, it was a narrow ruling that sidestepped the larger controversial constitutional questions surrounding Section 5 of the VRA, which requires certain jurisdictions, mostly in the South, to have any electoral changes "precleared" by the Justice Department. The idea of Section 5 was to thwart any Jim Crow attempts at electoral subterfuge--annexing more white voters to dilute black voting strength, moving polling places, whatever. No one doubted that such an extraordinary heavy federal hand made sense to undo the legacy of disfranchisement of African-American voters. But over the years, the provision has come under fire as antiquated and cumbersome although civil-rights groups reflexively support its continued enforcement. Only Clarence Thomas dissented. He wanted Section 5 tossed out entirely. Even Antonin Scalia wasn't prepared to go there yet.

More

Jun 22 2009, 11:37AM

Medicare And Competition: The Keys To A Real Public Plan

Ah, the priming effect. The public supports a health care plan if they're given information about its intention: by injecting competition, it would force private insurance companies to lower their prices and could possibly drive some out of business. When the public is asked to evaluate the public plan in bleaker terms, like when they're threatened with the loss of their choice of doctor, support drops, unsurprisingly. Unfortunately, policy makers are adding layers of complexity to what is a simpler debate: the public plan is basically Medicare with a different, less baggage-laden name. 

More

Jun 22 2009, 10:37AM

Supreme Court Upholds, But Narrows Voting Rights Act

By a vote of 8 to 1, The Supreme Court upheld Section 5 of Voting Rights Act, but says that it raises "serious constitutional questions" and that localities can "bail out" if practices survive scrutiny. 

That suggests that the Court wants a new challenge to the constitutionality of the provision, kicking the can down the road, in essence. 

The lopsided majority is seen as a surprise, as is the opinion's author, Chief Justice John Roberts. During oral argument, he evinced considerable skepticism about the government's arguments that preclearing election procedures in localities with a history of racial discrimination was still necessary. Administration officials worried that Roberts intended to build a majority to strike down the entire provision.  

Section 5 requires federal preclearance of voting procedure changes in places where minorities were discriminated against in the past. Congress overwhelmingly reauthorized Section 5 in 2006; most parts of the 1966 1965 Voting Rights Act are permanent. 

The court did not explicitly rule on the constitutionality of the act, although it recognized that its implementation more than 40 years after passage of the Voting Rights Act raises "serious constitutional concerns," and that the "preclearance requirement represents an intrusion into areas of stateand local responsibility that is otherwise unfamiliar to our federal system."

The case involved an attempt by a small utility district in Travis County, Texas to seek relief from the preclearance provision. There had been no history of discrimination by the district itself. A court disagreed, ruling that only an entity that formally registers voters could apply for a so-called "bailout."  The Supreme Court remanded the decision, concluding that a fair reading of the VRA's legislative intent did not mean to limit bail-out applications to those districts or municipal divisions that registered voters.  

Justice Clarence Thomas dissented, arguing that the act had run its course and the conditions that allow its imposition no longer exist.

A Justice Department spokesperson said the opinion was being reviewed.

Jun 22 2009, 8:46AM

PR Quote Of The Day: Facilitating Iran's Censorship

A joint venture between Nokia and Siemens sold technology to Iran that's giving the government the power to block and censor Internet communications, the Wall Street Journal reports. It falls to poor Nokia-Siemens spokesman Ben Roome to justify his company's business decision:

"We believe providing people, wherever they are, with the ability to communicate is preferable to leaving them without the choice to be heard."
Or not to be heard. The company didn't only sell Iran a nationwide mobile communications network -- it also built a sophisticated "monitoring" center that gives authorities the ability to block and censor incoming and outgoing communication. Undoubtedly, or many doubtfully, Iran justified the purchase of the center under the guise of cybersecurity, and it's true that Western governments -- like the U.S. -- have the same technology....just ask your friends at Ft. Meade and Google "Eric Lichtblau" and "NSA." 

Jun 22 2009, 8:37AM

The Demography Of The Obama Administration

National Journal profiles 366 top officials in the Obama administration for its quadrennial decision-makers issues and came up with a goldmine of interest demographic data about the administration.

A few items of note: ......12 percent of top Obama officials have served in the military, down from 18 percent of top officials at the start of Bush's first term.....although this statistic really has meaning when you think about the number of Obama officials from Illinois, New York and Washington, D.C.... and Virginia. ...... A top female Obama administration official is three times as likely to be single as her male counterpart. Four years ago, a top female Bush administration official was almost five times as likely to be single as her male counterpart..... The percentage of white Christians among top officials whose religious affiliation is known dropped from 71 percent during Bush's second term to 46 percent in the Obama administration.  ....37 percent of top Obama officials graduated from an Ivy League institution..... with Harvard being the top college for undergraduate and graduate degrees.

For a completely different take on the Best and the Brightest in the administration, you'll want to read this month's Harper's cover story, which asserts that Obama's top-tier intellectuals are getting it -- as in everything -- all wrong.

Jun 21 2009, 2:58PM

Obama To Dawn: Your Country Can Fight The Fight

President Obama gave what's being billed as the first ever American presidential interview to a newspaper in Pakistan, the English-language "Dawn," on Saturday, telling reporter Anwar Iqbal that Pakistan was strong enough to defeat extremism with the country.  Obama called Islamic radicalism a "cancer" on Southwest Asia.

Obama also professed not to be worried about the security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal -- and he made sure to call it "Pakistan's nuclear weapons" -- and said that India and Pakistan should continue their progress toward full and open talks between the two countries.

On Iran:

'We respect Iran's sovereignty, but we also are witnessing peaceful demonstrations, people expressing themselves, and I stand for that universal principle that people should have a voice in their own lives and their own destiny. And I hope that the international community recognises that we need to stand behind peaceful protests and be opposed to violence or repression.'

 

Mr Obama said that since there were no international observers in Iran, he could not say if the elections were fair or unfair. 'But beyond the election, what's clear is that the Iranian people are wanting to express themselves. And it is critical, as they seek justice and they seek an opportunity to express themselves, that that's respected and not met with violence.'


Jun 21 2009, 2:38PM

The Sunday Shows In Five Sentences Or Less

1. Israeli PM Bibi Netanyahu denies any rift with the Obama administration over Iran; says  reaction to his Palestinian state proposal was across-the-board magnificent; denies that his own status as PM will be challenged if he seeks peace with the Palestianians. Guests on several shows agreed that Obama has moved to convince the American people, the Iranian revolutionaries and the world that he is not completely neutral on the Iranian election.

2. Sen. Lindsey Graham reiterated his opposition to a "public plan" option included as part of health care reform but said that Sen. Kent Conrad's "co-op" idea might be the right way to go. Sen. Chris Dodd pronounced himself "delighted to hear that."

3. Sen. John McCain said that the administration would provide more details about its military commissions plan soon and hinted that part of those plans involved a "special court" in Washington, D.C.  He said that Pres. Obama didn't have to choose between intervening in an election and speaking out on  behalf of justice; he called for Obama's language to more closely mirror that of the President of Germany's and the PM of Britain's.

4. The guests on many shows agreed that the new UN sanctions against North Korea were, as ex-Sen. Sam Sunn said, "toothless."  The U.S. should be prepared to board ships regardless if the captain gives them permission, says Sen. McCain.

5. Chuck Todd says that the White House is frustrated that they're not getting credit for changing the dynamics of the Middle East (especially Iran) through the Cairo speech.

Jun 20 2009, 1:02PM

Acid From The Sky, Violence In the Streets

Andrew, Patrick and Chris are giving up their weekend so you can follow the unfolding events in Iran. There's no better place on the web right now.

Some highlights from their coverage:

11.40 am. Mousavi: I Am Ready For Death.

11.24 am. Chemical warfare? It is not boiling water but something else:

Helicopters spraying water with agent in it onto crowds. Skin irritant, will make it feel as though water is scalding.


I cannot make an Int. call to contact anyone outside of Tehran. Mazandaran, Guilan and Golestan seem worse than Tehran.

Jun 20 2009, 12:55PM

David Rhode Is Free

David Rhode, a 41-year-old New York Times reporter, was kidnapped by the Taliban in late 2008. For the past seven months, the journalistic world has engaged in a conspiracy of silence, of sorts, prompted by urgent requests from our New York Times colleagues and by the advice of regional experts who warned that calling attention to his captivity would endanger his life.  Rhode's wife of two months waited quietly.  Today, the Times announced that Rhode escaped from captivity. He is free and he is safe.

"From the early days of this ordeal, the prevailing view among David's family, experts in kidnapping cases, officials of several government and others we consulted was that going public could increase the danger to David and the other hostages," said Bill Keller, the executive editor of The Times. "The kidnappers initially said as much. We decided to respect that advice, as we have in other kidnapping cases, and a number of other news organizations that learned of David's plight have done the same. We are enormously grateful for their support."

Jun 19 2009, 3:35PM

Early Reviews Of House Health Care: Walking Back From The Ledge

Jonathan Cohn, The New Republic's health policy expert and one of the most trenchant observers of the intersection between policy and politics in Washington, has read through the summary of the 582-page draft of the House's Tricom health care bill.  He likes it:

"...[I]f the House follows through with money to pay for this program--a big "if," yes--then this proposal seems eminently sensible, at least upon first inspection. And the politics may not be quite as difficult as they seem. Remember, many of the propositions that alienate special interests and conservatives happen to be pretty popular with the voters. Reform will not make it through the process in this pristine form, obviously. But a bill like this change the parameters of debate, improving the final compromise.

I've contacted about a half-dozen friendly liberal wonks in the last 90 minutes, since the draft became public. Everybody seemed pleased. (One actually said "Boffo!") It's possible that they are as desperate as I've been for encouraging news; maybe impressions will sour as a fuller picture of the House proposal emerges. But, for the moment, this seems like good news. 

Jun 19 2009, 3:23PM

2009 State Tax Tsunami Already Hitting 23 States

With state budgets feeling the pinch and the federal government refusing to bailout even California, the national mascot of state deficits, 23 states have raised taxes in 2009, with 13 more states considering increases. There's every reason to think that eventually almost all states will raise income, sales or business taxes, considering that in the far milder recession of the early 1990s, 44 states raised taxes by more than one percent. Where are taxes rising this time?

Check out the map below to find out. Some takeaways: Every state west of Colorado has passed or proposed a tax increase. State governments are often passing the tax increases over painful spending cuts. California is raising income taxes by .25 percent on top of almost $15 billion in service cuts. Sales taxes are also getting creative, from raising the price of beer and wine (New York) to eliminating exemptions for hybrid vehicles (Washington) to extending the sales tax to music downloads and periodical subscriptions (Wisconsin). For more from the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities report, go here.

statetaxincrease.png

Jun 19 2009, 2:00PM

House Dems Health Care Plan: Very Reform-Y

Compared to the political confusion in the Senate right now, the House of Representative's three-committee health care draft is a model of clarity and politically pleasing language.  There's an interesting trigger mechanism for a public plan; it would tie itself to Medicare's provider rates for a few years, and then de-tether, meaning that, in essence, it would be very competitive early on but less so later, rewarding insurance companies who act quickly to match its efficiency. There's a "pay to play" requirement on employers, with exemptions for small businesses, that limits employer expenses to 8% of payroll. There's a coverage mandate. There are no 'revenue enhancers' just yet, although the House Ways and Means Committee is looking at a panoply of options, including income tax hikes, a soda tax, and a VAT tax.

Jun 19 2009, 1:33PM

Your Twitter Questions And My Answers

@jbennet: asks: "Who does Obama really listen to on foreign policy? Put differently -- who's running foreign policy?"

@marcambinder: I'll get in trouble, but, in rough order: Gates, Biden, Axelrod/Rahm, Rice, Jones, Clinton, Petraeus, Kerry, Lugar, McDonough, Rhodes, Sutphen, Flournoy

@egocrata asks: "Why this "health reform expensive" meme? The feds pay more, insurance ind. get less, consumers pay MUCH less. Savings for all."

@marcambinder: Over 15 yrs, yes. Short term requires $1 tril in "start up" money at least. And not clear that consumers will pay much less...they'll just get better care.

@terionright asks: "Will ABC Healthcare Commericial address whether Obama's program covers illegal immigrants? They are not answering. #tcot"

@marcambider: probably not. Obama doesn't have his own program; question is better asked of Congressional Democrats. Stop picking on ABC.

@Coffee260 asks "Why is it acceptable to act in the most immoral fashions as long as it's put into the category of "politics"

@marcambinder Fashionable immortality is the new green, I guess. Real answer: it isn't. Vote 'em out. (Unless you can't...)

@azizhp asks "question: why doesn't the Obama Administration invite questions the way you just did?"

@marcambinder: Ask them: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/ O

@drjjoyner asks "If the Dems can't push their healthcare plan now, given Obama's approval and Senate numbers, how will they ever do it?"

@marcambinder: Probably, but not for another couple of years at least. Time is auspicious now. Political winds still blowing favorably. But they'll shift rapidly this fall.

@lawyer_thomas asks: "Will Democrats be able to blame Republicans for problems when Republicans are seen as very weak?"

@marcambinder: Dems are less popular these days, but Republicans are allergic to popularity. That's one reason why Obama and his Congress still have headwinds despite the economy and deficits.'

@lavaaaron "Is Gay Marriage debate/DOMA, etc a political liability for Obama?"

@marcambinder: Better q is: is it priority worth expending pol. capital? Not really, in his view.




Jun 19 2009, 8:52AM

If You Were An Iran Analyst For The CIA....

@elilake: "Shorter Khamenei: Ajad won, u are all going to take it, if u don't my goons will murder u."

To go back to that rubric for a moment... if the Director of National Intelligence tasked the Persia Desk with making a prediction about the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's speech this morning, I bet the analyst would have predicted roughly the speech that Khamenei gave, given an analysis of his personal history, the political context and Khamenei's perception of Iran's status in the world and in the Muslim world. Belligerent, defensive, isolationist; bellicose rhetoric about the West; carefully laying blame on conspiratorial forces rather than individual politicians; stern warnings about protests. Did Khamenei really have any other choice? If President Obama have come down forcefully on the side of the protestors and students, would Khamenei's rhetoric be different today? To this, some will say: well, if Khamenei would say the same thing, then why shouldn't Obama have said more? To which one might well respond: the millions of protesters know whether the U.S. is meddling or not. If they're not and Khamenei says they are, he's not credible -- even less credible. If they are, and Khamenei says they are, then he's correct. And anger might well turn toward the United States.

So -- if you were an Iran analyst for the CIA, what happens now?

Jun 19 2009, 8:32AM

The Anxiety Of Influence

The influential political blogger Nate Silver agrees with Bill Maher: 

"This has been an extremely cautious White House to date; they have scrupulously avoided doing anything that might ruffle Congressional or public feathers and they are probably afraid of gambling on a specific plan and losing. But as Neville Chamberlain learned long ago, and Spock learned in the latest version of Star Trek, caution does not always equate with safety. It is time for the White House to take hold of this debate and not let go."

Without reference to policy outcomes, I concur, in part, with this analysis, and I dissent, in part. But my concurrence does not imply that I agree with Silver's premise: that Obama is "afraid of gambling on a specific plan and losing," or that his "caution" is the safe option. What follows is not a defense of the Obama Way, but instead attempt to explain what it means for policy.

Obama HAS avoided anything that would ruffle the delicate Congressional feathers. Why? Because the White House believes, from experience, that the president's agenda will advance more quickly through Congress if the White House provides little reason for the legislative branch to fight with the executive branch. From experience, they conclude that it is much easier to broker a deal between Democratic factions and the two cameras of Congress than it would be if Obama were pushing for more specifics. (Yes, there is an element here of a lesson learned from the Clinton administration, but Obama isn't Clinton.)  It's not that they're afraid of losing -- it's that they want to win. Within the broader complaint about relative inaction on health care, some liberals worry that Obama isn't pushing for the type of change that fundamentally reforms and reshapes our health care institutions to fit a model that conforms to the way liberals believe the world works.

These criticisms of Obama miss at least one fundamental aspect of his personality, one that was evident in his presidential campaign: Obama has an abiding faith in the institutions of government. As a constitutional law nerd, he really does believe that Congress has a significant role to play in making legislation (and he has a corresponding belief that the prerogatives of the executive branch's actions on national security are sacrosanct." Parallel to the faith in institutions is an almost magical belief in the power of consensus. He's using his presidential powers, implied and actual, to build a consensus about health care reform, one that will last beyond his presidency. It isn't simply that Obama feels constrained by political realities in Congress, although that's part of it. It's that he believes that the best way to accomplish the most change is to let Congress legislate and let the President build public support for the end product, which still conforms to the goals that Obama laid out during his campaign. Don['t confuse bipartisanship with consensus; bipartisanship refers to outcomes, and the outcome here won't be liked by Republicans. Consensus refers to the process and to the way in which the public perceives the issue. 

In the end, the criticisms boil down to a war about the definition of enough. Is achieving universal health insurance access enough of a major change? Can the regulatory reforms be enough if they don't subvert the risk-reward dynamic? If they involve existing institutions?  

If you're inclined to think of Obama as an avatar of radical change, you're right: most combat troops plan to withdraw from Iraq on roughly the same timetable as Obama promised they would during the campaign. Obama's studious silence on the Iranian elections is a terrifically (or terribly) radical departure from the way the previous president would deal with the same conflict. Obama has broken through the crustiness of the Middle East peace process and is approaching Israel from a different, albeit sympathetic perspective. On his initiative, Obama and the Congress passed $800 billion worth of demand-side spending. The government took over major failing companies. His regulatory reforms include a new, fairly well empowered consumer finance protection agency -- a change so significant that his own Fed is already telling reporters that they're going to fight it. To say that the White House has been extremely cautious to date is just inaccurate.

On health care, Silver writes:

But the Doomsday Scenario for the White House is probably not that health care fails a straight up-or-down vote, but rather, that no individual version of the bill has enough votes to pass as legislators convince themselves they can hold out for an alternative more to their liking, while all the while the industry is having time bought for it to lobby against the bill, or to watch any of several political contingencies unfold (another crash in the stock market; the incapacitation of Senator Kennedy, which would deprive Democrats of a vote until a special election were held in Massachusetts) that could weaken the Democrats' position.

Yes, this is the doomsday scenario, but it is not clear at all that the same scenario would not exist if Obama had endorsed a public plan with teeth and had specified details that Congress is now debating. Congress would be eager to show its independence, and there might be even more variations of the health care bills.  One additional characteristic of the Obama mind that comes into play here is his flexibility. He does not apply the same level of pressure to all situations. Health reform is a majoritarian idea, but a government-run system isn't. There is no public appetite for radical change; no mandate for it; no reason to think that Obama alone could move public opinion that much on the wisdom of having the government, and not insurance companies, mediate between providers and doctors. 

Going back to the campaign, change has never meant massively tearing down and rebuilding institutions. It has meant, instead, using those institutions, which have steadily evolved over 200 years (Obama really is a stickler for precedent in law and in government) to achieve specific, concrete policy goals that, in Obama's view, make lives better. Those who want him to move faster don't understand how fast he thinks he is moving, and they don't quite understand the Obama method, and they disagree with Obama about the ends themselves. 

Jun 19 2009, 8:19AM

The Death Of Health Care Reform, Cont.

Fast and furious, the journalists in this town continue to move toward the conclusion that major health care reform is dead, dead, dead for the year. Mike Allen and Jim VandeHei call it "in real jeopardy." A draft of the new Senate Finance Committee legislation obtained by Ezra Klein cuts back premium subsidies significantly and does not include a "public option." House liberals are shopping a candybag full of potential tax hikes, including one on artificially sweetened drinks. I can't predict the future, but I approach this from a slightly different angle. We've reached, certainly, a point of clarity in the health care debate. We know, fairly precisely, what the political boundaries are -- the room within which a bill must be written to reach the magic number of votes in both chambers. Several very important and eternally difficult challenges remain, including the size and composition of the employer mandate, the "revenue enhancers" needed to pay for approximately $400 billion worth of additional spending, and the precise rules under which insurance companies are going to have to live by. If and when we look back to this debate from the hindsight of a bill that does pass, I think what we'll find faulty is the idea that Democrats thought they could sell health care reform without sacrifice. That magical notion simply has no bearing on reality. Health reform was -- is -- always going to be an expensive, complex endeavor requiring political capital expenditures and greenback expenditures. 

Jun 18 2009, 6:48PM

Useful Political Tweets Of The Day, 6/18

I, @marcambinder, follow more than 1,000 twitterers a day so you don't have to. A digest of some of the more useful, or interesting, tweets:

@kagrox
"I have a feeling this Froomkin firing turns into one of those "best thing that ever happened to me" stories." [Editor's note: Dan Froomkin's column is no more.]

@GregMitch: "Andrew Sullivan on Froomkin fired: Astounding. One blogger who kept WaPo real. Stance on torture a reason? Blogosphere should revolt."

@cqpolitics "Poll Tracker: Virginia Governor: McDonnell, Deeds In Dead Heat http://tinyurl.com/krlnon "

@pam_spaulding :... is Tweeting: The Words The President (& Others) Won't Speak: "Transgender" & "Gender Identity And Ex.. http://tinyurl.com/luxruu"

@markosm "RT @briefingroom: Gillibrand comes out against Don't Ask Don't Tell: http://tinyurl.com/nnbqz5"


Jun 18 2009, 5:00PM

What Do Gays Want From Obama? An Exchange

Yesterday, I wrote:

"What do gays want? They want the Recognizer in Chief, the Persuader in Chief, the Leader -- to recognize them. They want visibility; they want acknowledgment that Obama doesn't take their money and presidential support for granted; they want assurances -- words and deeds -- that Obama will fulfill his campaign promises. They want Obama to expend his political capital to get supermajorities in the Senate for legislation getting rid of the ban on gays in the military and ending discrimination against gays in the workplace."

After the jump, two other views.

More

Jun 18 2009, 4:30PM

FAIL was fun while it lasted....

After today, new rule: no longer will I use FAIL -- the latest lingo to cross into the mainstream from the geek world -- to describe things that are failing. CNN Fail. DNA Fail. Economy Fail. Obama Fail. Enough already.

Jun 18 2009, 3:23PM

Using YouTube To Push Intelligence Reform

Intelligence and national security geeks should see this new YouTube video from Chris Rasmussen, a social media specialist at the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency.  I've never seen something like it: an employee of an intelligence agency using YouTube to critically evaluate a critical assumption about American intelligence agency production. (Chris had to get the YouTube vetted and re-vetted...it seems to have been a drawn out process. But in the end, his supervisors were apparently OK with his evangelism.) 

More

Jun 18 2009, 2:20PM

Obama's Grand Rhetorical Strategy: It's All Connected

Christopher Beam at Slate makes the excellent observation that President Obama excels at selling his policy reforms as the solution to a complex web of issues extending far beyond the core policy. Health care reform, for example, is always about more than health care. It's about corporate competitiveness, a nimble job market that isn't tethered to precious employer benefits, more disposable income for families, freed up state funds for education and infrastructure, diminished deficits, diminished reliance on foreign owners of the deficit, and so on. Beam quips, "the only thing left for Obama to cite is some statistic showing most terrorist attacks are the result of high premiums."

Beam hits on most of the advantages of Obama's karmic approach to selling policy, but I wanted to highlight two distinct drawbacks. First, it forces him to promise too much from his reforms. Second, as anybody who's played Jenga knows, interconnectedness has its risks.

To be sure, promising too much from your policies is a prerogative of governing. But in Obama's case, where no stone should be left unturned by reform, I think it threatens to raise public expectations to a level where reality will prove to be a consistent disappointment. Take his cap-and-trade policies. Obama sees it creating five million jobs, reducing emissions by 80 percent by 2050, and saving Americans $130 billion on energy bills.

Now wait. The point of cap-and-trade (or carbon taxing) is to price the negative externality of carbon pollution to discourage profligate production by firms and over-use by consumers. That means creating a little bit of hitherto unfelt pain to teach both sides the true cost of carbon. How do you raise the market price of carbon nearer to its environmental "cost" and save Americans money on their energy bills in the short term? It's not possible, really. Whether you auction the carbon allowances and kick back to consumers or don't auction the allowances and foot consumers with a larger bill, the price of energy has to rise. In the long term, perhaps, "everybody wins." In the short term, everybody pays.

jenga.jpg There are other risks that follow inevitably from the everything-is-connected school of speaking. If every reform is balancing on another policy, what happens when that Jenga piece comes loose? Beam quotes Obama tying the GM bailout to health care reform. On the one hand, he's right to do so. GM pays $65 per hour to its employees when you factor in its bloated health care costs to current and retired workers, which contributed to its money woes. But it's ominous that today the New York Times released a poll finding that the public is falling behind the Obama administration on two key issues: GM and health care reform. While the president's overall approval rating is still a healthy 63 percent, views of the president's job with the auto industry and health care hover in the mid-to-low 40s, and this before what will be a sweltering summer of negotiations in DC.

Obama's ability to explain himself through narratives rather than sound bites is, on the whole, a distinct advantage, and Beam is right to focus his piece on the positive aspects of Obama's karmic worldview, in which we are all connected in the great circle of policy reform. But, as we head into a health care process where Obama clearly has more convincing to do, I wonder whether he'll continue to sample from a buffet of interconnected benefits of reform, or pick one theme and run with it.

Jenga! Flickr image from 416style.

Jun 18 2009, 1:25PM

Obama Slow To Act On State Secrets Doctrine Act

The Senate Judiciary Committee holds hearings today on the State Secrets Doctrine, intending to mark up legislation that would require in camera reviews and prevent the executive branch from using this executive privilege to throw out entire cases. The hearings have been scheduled since April. The Obama administration has yet to provide guidance, publicly or privately, to committee Democrats about its position. (Soon, soon, says Attorney General Eric Holder.)  Democrats anticipate that the White House will object to any legislation that actually reduces the power of the executive branch but would accept legislation that ensures transparency for decisions that the executive branch makes. This could be a real interesting internecine, inter-branch battle. 

Jun 18 2009, 12:59PM

Evidence Of Fraud In The Iranian Elections

I'm sort of an expert fetishist, so I've waited until now to post on the hard evidence for fraud in the Iranian elections. Mark Blumenthal, an expert I trust, points me to the conclusion of an expert he really trusts, Walter Mebane, whose sophisticated analysis of Ahmadinejad's totals over two elections suggest "moderately strong support for a diagnosis that the 2009 election was afflicted by significant fraud."

Jun 18 2009, 11:57AM

Health Care: Dead, Dying, Or Delayed? Orrrrszzzzaaaag!

Two of the leading left-leaning health politics experts, Jonathan Cohn and Ezra Klein, post detailed frets about the state of health care reform. Klein calls the project "in danger." Cohn's post is illustrated with a picture of a panic sign.  Their thesis: the CBO score of the Senate Finance Committee's initial proposals produce such a wave of unease among Democrats that the back-to-the-drawing board options to save $600 billion are bound to significantly weaken the bill.  Both Klein and Cohn -- along with many health economists -- don't necessarily oppose the more expensive versions. Will the system crumble because Max Baucus, the chairman of the finance committee, is wedded to an older model of politics?

How did we get here? Ask Peter Orszag.

More

Jun 18 2009, 10:58AM

The Centrist Fallacy

A few things to know about Washington. The press loves centrists. Any self-styled moderate who bucks their party is sure to get good play and generally centrists aren't shy about letting you know it. So it's worth noting the important story by Molly Hooper in the Hill on Wednesday night. All kinds of moderates are having all kinds of meetings over health care. Will it lead to anything? Sometimes they do and sometimes they don't. This time my guess is not.

More

Jun 18 2009, 9:40AM

Media Meme: #Obama
STALL

Item: ""The honeymoon is coming to an end for President Obama, but it's not personal. It's professional," says NBC's Chuck Todd.

Item: "In poll, Obama seen as ineffective on the economy." 

Item: An influential foreign policy journalist sees the U.S. as struggling to find the right posture on Iran.

Item: Coverage of the President's financial regulation plans are biased toward the unfavorable reaction of Wall Street.

Item: Numerous analysts conclude that the tempo of health care reform is slowing down because fiscal realities (and the CBO) are intruding on the optimism and energy.

Item: President Bush feels emboldened to step up criticism of his successor.

Item: Presidential pal/rival John McCain says the President isn't showing leadership.

Item: Bill Maher wants Obama to act a little more like Bush and take some risks.

....

Them's a few days worth of headlines. And I didn't even mention the gays! The media is on a kick these days. Where Obama's agenda has been packed of items and accomplishments, he's on a roll. Then, "realities" always intrude, and Obama's agenda "stalls" as the public begins to have doubts.  The cycle of coverage seems to be based, or at least, set to the music of the public's appreciative murmurs or disapproving groans.  The reality, as always, is that Obama is never as up as he is when he is "up," and never in as bad a spot as he is when he is "down."

The same polling that suggests some growing skepticism about Obama's ability to contain the deficit shows that his approval rating remains near 60 percent, down only slightly. Americans remain -- and are growing -- much more confident about the future than they were. Americans do not blame Obama for the deficits. They have a much better impression of the Democratic Party than they do the Republican Party, which seems to be going out of its way to help the Democrats.

There has always been a gap between Obama's personal popularity -- as Chuck Todd points out -- and support for some of his policies. But take a look at which policies are unpopular: the bailout of the auto industry and deficit spending -- policies that the public still associates with Republican excesses, not with Obama's.

To be sure, the public opinion landscape is less positive for Obama than it was, and independents, in particular, don't quite accept the White House's grand narrative about why these deficits are OK but these deficits aren't.  I've seen private polling done for Democratic House races out West that shows real concern among less-ideological Democrats about the direction of Obama's economic and health care policies.  A Democratic strategist who has close ties to the leadership in Congress tells me  "that the budget deficit and spending are very hot button issues  hat are permeating into races on all levels and creating a sour mood 
that could potentially explode in our face. "

And when given information about the costs of health care and its likely impact on the deficit, the numbers for electing Republicans, not just generically, but any named candidate, under 
the header "to bring back balanced government" go through the roof, this strategist says. That explains why Democratic Senators are panicking about the early, preliminary CBO scores: they don't want the public to see the plans first in terms of the deficit. They'd rather them see the good parts: universal coverage, etc.

Reports of opposition to a "public plan" are overrated, but the political reality will be created by the party that best frames the issue: putting government between you and your doctor is the favored riff of Republicans these days, thanks to Frank Luntz. It's catchy. The Obama-Democratic riff is that health reform is an imperative. The public agrees with Obama and is also afraid of the effects of reform, as if there's a way to somehow reform a major institution without affecting the people who are happy with it.  That dissonance is always present in public opinion, easily able to be exploited by both sides of an argument.  It's a little disingenuous to say that a major revision of health care in America won't touch those who like their insurance plan and their doctors. Some Americans are bound to find that their choices narrow, or increase; that their premiums may rise, or fall; that the number of tests they get declines; that the insurance company begins to bother them more frequently about preventative medicine. 

So -- Democrats in Congress are slowing down a bit, and the calendar for health care legislation is being expanded, as the White House knew that it would.

The upshot of all of this is to say that the media meme is reductive. There are some fairly solid baselines for the Obama presidency, and there are some trends that his strategists are going to watch. 

I would not expect this White House to overreact. "These days happen once every couple of months," a senior administration official e-mailed this morning. "They are almost like clockwork."

Jun 18 2009, 6:55AM

How Likely Is A Mousavi Presidency?

If you ask private-sector Iran analysts about the likelihood of Mir Hossein Mousavi becoming president--or of Ayatollah Khamenei's regime announcing a do-over of the election--a few salient points emerge:

1. This would require a major backing down by Khamenei--an admission of his own fallacy. Khamenei blessed the election as a "divine miracle" on Sunday, crediting the "miraculous hand of God" with high voter turnout. This is seen as an endorsement of the whole election--including the results--and perhaps an irreversible step for Khamenei. If the results are nullified, Khamenei's supreme authority would be questioned.

"Khamenei and the Guardian Council and the guards have to admit that's a fraudulent vote," Alireza Nader of the Rand Corporation said. "I just don't see that happening right now."

More

Jun 17 2009, 7:34PM

No Recess Appointments For Koh, Johnson

President Barack Obama has no plans to use his constitutional power during the next Congressional recess to appoint either of two legal policy nominees whose views have raised concerns among a handful of Democrats.

For weeks, the nominations of Dawn Johnsen to become the head of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, and Harold Koh, to be the State Department's chief legal adviser, have been stalled. There simply aren't enough Democrats who will support either of them. Pro-life activists object to Johnsen's work as a chief counselor to NARAL, and a handful of conservative lawyers believe that Koh, a self-described "transnationalist," would gove too much weight to foreign legal interpretations. Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) has cited Johnsen's pro-choice activism in announcing his opposition. Opposition to Koh is more diffuse, although it's not clear whether most senators have taken the time to read the body of Koh's work, which has drawn praise from very prominent conservatives.

More

Jun 17 2009, 7:28PM

Protests In Iran

Video of Mir Hossein Mousavi's supporters holding a silent demonstration in Iran.

Jun 17 2009, 7:27PM

The Day In Politics, 6/17

Today, we learned that the Obama administration's stance on state secrets legislation is forthcoming; Tom Daschle and Bob Dole introduced a health care "compromise"; the White House granted some benefits to domestic partners of gay federal employees; and it released a white paper on regulatory reform; Kathleen Sebelius reiterated the pledge of deficit neutral health care reform; and Eric Holder and Sen. Russ Feingold sparred over the legality of warrantless wiretapping.

More

Jun 17 2009, 7:17PM

Quote of the Day: Obama on Regulatory Reform

Regulators were charged with seeing the trees, not the forest.

Jun 17 2009, 7:02PM

The Invisible Primary, 6/17

Tracking the GOP race to 2012

A Draft Jindal effort, the "Jindal for President Draft Council," has been disbanded at the behest of Jindal's gubernatorial campaign organization; and John Ensign stepped down from his Senate leadership post after his admission of an affair.

Jun 17 2009, 4:55PM

Experts: Iranian Revolution Unlikely

The political turmoil in Iran has been referred to casually by American observers as a revolution, and there's a hope among some that it will result in dramatic regime change in Iran. But experts say it's unlikely that the demonstrations will result in an overthrow of Ayatollah Khamenei's regime.

"The key question [of whether the regime could collapse] is whether the security forces (and, especially the provincial IRGC [Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps] units) would turn on the government and join the protesters," Michael Rubin of the American Enterprise Institute told me in an email Monday night. "We have not yet seen any evidence of this."

That was Monday, but with official news reports still coming out of Iran after a ban on foreign journalists covering "unauthorized" demonstrations in person, and with information still spreading on Twitter, there are reports that the Guard--which, it's assumed, was complicit in the Ahmadinejad "victory"--is still actively working against the protestors' aims, with no evidence of a change in allegiance.

More

Jun 17 2009, 4:03PM

What Gays Want From President Obama

Skeptical gay rights activists aren't satisfied with the forthcoming presidential memorandum ordering federal agencies to provide same-sex partners of government employees with some of the benefits previously reserved for heterosexuals. There is plenty of debate about whether Obama is actually expanding rules that agencies already enforce and have been enforcing since the early Clinton administration. Advocates for gay rights are passing around a link (http://www.obamasplanforgayrights.com/) to an Obama-esque website that purports to unveil his plan for gay rights. Clicking on the website leads you a page with one word: "Nothing."

More

Jun 17 2009, 3:49PM

Feingold Spars With Holder Over NSA Legalities

That's a loaded question. The answer is "yes," but the way I asked the question is loaded with two words that appropriately trigger our civil libertarian sensibilities. "Spy" and "Americans."  There are, in fact, about 10 to 12 special access programs that involve the National Security Agency and domestic intelligence collection. These programs have now been fully briefed to Congress, and some of them were revised and made whole, as it were, by Congress in the latter years of the Bush administration. So when Sen. Russ Feingold asked the Attorney General, Eric Holder, about whether warrantless domestic surveillance is illegal, Holder wasn't able to say "yes," even though he -- and candidate Barack Obama -- specifically called "warantless NSA surveillance" "illegal."  Here's Holder, speaking six months ago: "I never thought I would see a president act in direct defiance of federal law by authorizing warantless NSA surveillance of American citizens." It's a check and egg question: Holder now believes that the NSA's programs are legal because Congress says they're legal. Feingold disagrees with Congress's legal interpretation. Read the full exchange between Holder and Feingold after the jump.

More

Jun 17 2009, 3:45PM

Sebelius Reiterates: No Deficit Spending

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius took the Obama administration's health care platform to the Democratic Leadership Council's policy forum today, reiterating the administration's plan to make its health reform efforts deficit neutral.

"In the days ahead, we will work with Congress and address other proposals for funding health reform. We are open to good ideas. But we are not open to deficit spending," Sebelius said.

"Health reform will be paid for and it will be deficit neutral over ten years."

More

Jun 17 2009, 1:43PM

The Real Story On Health Care Costs

A smart health care observer e-mails:

One thing to remember, though.  It's not really correct to say that a HELP-like scheme will necessarily inflate the deficit.  In fact, on the expenditures side, the Finance bill is going to look extremely similar.  There will be subsidies for the poor and working class, tax credits for small business, some increases in what providers are paid, etc.  Just like in HELP.  In addition, Finance will have one very large chunk of extra expenditures -- a Medicaid expansion -- that HELP doesn't.

But Finance will also have the revenue and offsets -- some combination of employer mandate, exclusion reform, Medicare savings, redacted Medicare Advantage payments, and tax hikes on the rich.  And when you put those all together, it should be revenue netural.

I guess what I'm saying is that it's not really true that the partial HELP bill shows us that health reform will grow the deficit. It all depends on whether lawmakers pay for those expenditures -- which is something we've known all along. 

The fact that HELP didn't indicate how to pay for them is entirely a function of their decision not to fill in certain blanks right now (the employer mandate) and their jurisdiction (they can't do new taxes). Which, by the way, is why you'er right that it was really stupid to submit a partial bill -- although I gather (a) they thought CBO would take into account promises to fill in the blanks (b) they may have needed a placeholder estimate to start markup.

The real issue right now: the internal CBO score of the Senate Finance Committee bill, which came in way overbudget. Even though the CBO's assumptions are very conservative, the bill won't make it anywhere unless the $1.6 trillion cost estimate is somehow reduced, at least in the CBO's eyes.  In some ways, it's a question of values: is it worth an additional $1.6 trillion over ten years to reform health care in a meaningful way and cover everyone? Or are the political consequences of deficits to great to bear?

Jun 17 2009, 1:33PM

The Top 30 Washington Insiders on Twitter

As Twitter has risen, so too has political tweeting.

The Atlantic's Will DiNovi and Chris Van Buren have compiled a guide to the 30 top political insiders on Twitter, what they care about, and what they say. From Deputy Iraqi Prime Minister Barham Salih to Karl Rove to Joint Chiefs Chairman Mike Mullen, the list includes 17 journalists, four current elected officials, two former elected officials, three strategists, plus, Mullen, Markos Moulitsas, and Meghan McCain.

Twitter's political influence has taken off since last August, when House Republicans used it to promote their protests on the House floor against Democrats' policy against new offshore oil drilling. Recently, Newt Gingrich made news on Twitter by calling Sonia Sotomayor a racist; and now, it's under a spotlight for the role it's playing in the upheaval in Iran.

Read the list to see Twitter's top political users and their tweeting specialties.

Jun 17 2009, 12:59PM

For Your Reading: Regulatory White Paper

Impress your friends: read the White House white paper on regulatory reform here.

Jun 17 2009, 12:34PM

White House White Paper On Same-Sex Benefits

With Obama's memorandum, the domestic partners of federal employees can take advantage of various benefits heretofore reserved for heterosexual couples, including adding their partners to some insurance programs and using sick leave to care for sick spouses.

For civil service employees, domestic partners of federal employees can be added to the long-term care insurance program; supervisors can also be required to allow employees to use their sick leave to take care of domestic partners and non-biological, non-adopted children.  For foreign service employees, a number of benefits were identified, including the use of medical facilities at posts abroad, medical evacuation from posts abroad, and inclusion in family size for housing allocations.

What about health care benefits? The administration notes that it is following the guidance that "existing laws" provide, and the recent disputes over the Defense of Marriage Act involve health insurance benefits. So -- we don't know yet.

This is a memorandum, not an executive order, which means that it expires once the President's administration expires.

After the jump, the full memo.

More

Jun 17 2009, 12:27PM

The Daschle-Dole Health Care "Compromise"

Today, former Senate Majority Leaders Tom Daschle and Bob Dole unveil a bipartisan health care reform plan that they're billing as a "compromise" between GOP and Democratic health care principles.

The root of the plan is a reformulation of the incentives that guide our health care system. The delivery of health care would be tied closely to pay-for-performance initiatives; payments for low-value services would be reduced. Community-based "chronic health teams" would be dispatched to at-risk areas to provide care for those with chronic care. Over time, these delivery reforms -- so far unspecified -- would be integrated into medical education for health professionals. The leaders say they'd realign reimbursement in federal programs to patient outcomes over time.

There'd be an individual coverage mandate; insurance companies would be required to cover everyone and there would be limited variation of premiums, although patients would be able to alter their premiums in exchange for "healthy behavior," like losing weight.  There'd be lots of tax credits for employers and municipalities who implemented wellness programs that worked.

 There's no "public plan" per se, but there'd be a "federal fall back" if the insurance companies didn't or couldn't implement cost-cutting and efficiency measures on their own.

An accompanying television ad urges partisans to "cross the line."  To pay for their health reform proposal, the leaders (capitalized in a preview document as the Leaders, which makes me think of North Korea for some reason) propose $1 trillion in specific savings and then give Congress a choice of either designing a budget trigger to automatically implement cuts if needed or, revenue enhancements.

Premiums would be limited to not more than 15% of out of pocket expenditures and those earning up to 400% of the poverty level would be eligible for subsidies.

An independent Health Care Council would promote coordination among federal health programs, issue cost-cutting recommendations to Congress, and reform medical liability laws. (They sort of punt on the specifics of this last piece.)

It may be too late to effect the debate in Congress, but the Leaders, along with funding provided by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, plan to run television advertisements in support of the idea of Democrats and Republicans working together.

Jun 17 2009, 12:04PM

More Neocon Buffoonery

You would think that the Neocons would be a tad temperate after having gotten so many things wrong for so long. But look at the way the amiable Weekly Standard writer and Dick Cheney biographer, Steven Hayes, takes a shot at President Obama for insufficiently supporting the protesters in Iran.

I won't claim to understand Iranian politics well enough to know just what the right thing to do here is, and it may be that the administration should be more outspoken in favor of the protesters. I don't know.

It's not enough, though, for Neocons to disagree with the Obama policy--they have to impugn his motives too. Thus Hayes writes of Obama, "Does he actually prefer Ahmadinejad?" and "His policy is regime preservation. And it's a disgrace." There's nothing in the administration record to suggest that they want to uphold the Ahmadinejad regime.

More

Jun 17 2009, 11:50AM

Twitter's Double-Edged Sword In Iran?

Time's Lev Grossman reports there are widespread rumors that the Iranian government is using Twitter, which has delivered vast quantities of unconfirmed information to the rest of the world about what's going on in Iran, to its own advantage as the turmoil unfolds:
Rumors of the Iranian authorities' tampering with Twitter traffic are rampant. But very little hard data is available, and so far it's not clear that they've throttled Twitter completely. Why not is a matter of great speculation. It's quite possible that the government finds Twitter useful as a way of monitoring protesters, gathering data on them and even tracking them down. There are also signs that the Iranian government may be infiltrating the Twitter network itself, manipulating it to its own advantage. This tweet went out over the network earlier today, and was itself retweeted more than 200 times:

DO NOT RT anything U read from "NEW" tweeters, gvmt spreading misinfo
("RT" stands for re-tweet.)

Jun 17 2009, 11:32AM

Holder Hearing: Obama's State Secrets View Due Soon

The Obama administration has re-asserted the powerful State Secrets Doctrine in at least three cases. Al-Haramain v. Obama, Mohammed v. Jeppesen, and Jewel v. NSA. The Department of Justice concluded that President Bush's lawyers correctly applied the privilege in those cases.

Tomorrow, the Senate Judiciary Committee will begin marking up the State Secrets Protection Act. The Bush Department objected to the legislation on constitutional grounds -- it would give the judiciary branch the authority to determine what constitutes a national security fact. What's the department's view now?

Attorney General Eric Holder said that the administration would soon "release our views" on the issue. "It's our view the proposals that we're going to  make will deal with many of the concerns that generated the feeling that there was a need for legislation."

We will see.

Jun 17 2009, 10:15AM

Signs Of Recovery

Blogging about her recession road trip as an Atlantic Correspondent, Christina Davidson says Sen. Tom Coburn might have a point that $300 signs at stimulus construction sites are a bit over the top:

More

Jun 17 2009, 6:31AM

Re-Regulation And The Markets: An Upgrade Or An Overhaul?

"It has called into question the fundamentals of our system," a senior administration official said today about the nation's economic crisis.

The big debate: are the regulatory reforms the President intends to introduce today  more like a Windows Service Pack upgrade than a whole new architecture and interface? FinReg 1.5 or FinRef 2.0? FinReg Vista? FinReg 7?  (You get the idea.)

There will be complaints about specific provisions and their effects on risk-taking, but there is little in the reforms that will discourage the sort of responsible risk-taking that honest, capitalized firms tend to engage in. The administration seems to have resisted the temptation to shuffle the boxes on an organizational chart and call it an improvement. They identified the causes of the meltdown and came up with specific fixes. Arguably, they've also created backstops for future crises. This is the most ambitious and comprehensive reform since the 1930s; it involves some substantial streamlining and the creation of several new entities that could be be major stabilizing forces for generations

The administration is selling this to banks and Wall Street by pointing to the efficiency of creating a national bank regulator and by consolidating and updating rules and regulations.   The administration is selling this to consumers by pointing to a new consumer protection agency that would guard against financial financial manipulation of consumers -- a consumer shied is what the White House will call it. This agency could become very powerful -- and it might be the overall headline of the series of proposals. It's the part of the proposal that Obama himself seems to be the most passionate about.

Congress is concerned about the power that the Federal Reserve will acquire under this scheme; the Fed is an agency that is not terribly responsive to policy-makers (and isn't set up to be.)  The Fed has two charters now: it's responsible for making sure that the industry is functioning -- i.e., that it is growing and profitable -- at the same time as it is responsible, at least in theory, for tough new regulation.   To that, the administration might note that consumer protection is being taken away from the Fed.

The government will create a new category of financial holding companies and hold them to higher capital requirements and subject them to tighter regulation -- and will empower the Federal Reserve to more closely supervise them.  A new national bank supervisor will oversee all regulation of all federally chartered banks.

The administration will endorse the concept of "skin in the game" when it comes to the securitization market. They'll require the sponsor of a loan to keep at least 5% of the credit risk of the secruitized instruments. 

Credit default swaps and over-the-counter derivatives will be more tightly regulated -- details TBD. Hedge funds will have to register themselves -- details TBD.

Jun 17 2009, 6:00AM

Iran Backlash

Will the protests and riots following Iran's disputed election have any impact on the nation's government? Assuming results won't be overturned, will the public backlash push the Ayatollah's regime toward a moderate posture?

Jun 16 2009, 9:39PM

Pinwale And The New NSA Revelations

The New York Times' Pulitzer-Prize-winning duo of Eric Lichtblau and James Risen have new details about the extent of National Security Agency surveillance of electronic communications in the United States. They reveal that a dispute over e-mail monitoring of Americans was at the heart of a now famous confrontation between then-acting Attorney General James Comey and White House counsel Alberto Gonzales.  L and R refer to the program as having the code name of "Pinwale."  Pinwale, though, is actually an unclassified proprietary term used to refer to advanced data-mining software that the government uses. Contractors who do SIGINT mining work often include a familiarity with Pinwale as a prerequesite for certain jobs. To keep things straight, the American public now has confirmation of at least four separate NSA domestic surveillance programs. The first is the Terrorist Surveillance Program, which involves the monitoring of telephone calls. The second is "Stellar Wind," a code name for a program that involves meta-data mining. The third is a program that keeps tabs on all the information that flows through telecom hubs under the control of U.S. companies and within the U.S. The fourth is the Pinwale e-mail exploitation. Obviously, these programs overlap.  A marvelous new book about the NSA, The Secret Sentry, reports that there are at least ten separate new counterterrorist programs that are segregated from the rest of the NSA's highly classified programs and activities. Four down, six to go. (For more on the NSA's activities, please read my colleague Shane Harris's collected works.)

Jun 16 2009, 7:19PM

Ensign Admits Affair Last Year; Says Woman And Husband Were Close Friends

Here's the statement from Sen. John Ensign, (R-NV). Note that he does not mention why he's decided to go public now. He gives clues about the identity of the woman -- it's fairly obvious, given that his staff is telling reporters that the woman was a campaign aide who was married to member of Ensign's staff. (Just Google it.)

"I came home to Nevada to come forward and explain to the citizens of our state something that I was involved in about a year ago. Last year I had an affair. I violated the vows of my marriage. It is the worst thing I have ever done in my life. If there was ever anything in my life that I could take back, this would be it. "I take full responsibility for my actions. "I know that I have deeply hurt and disappointed my wife Darlene, my children, my family, my friends, my staff and others who believed in me. To all of them, especially my wife, I am deeply sorry. I am truly blessed to have a wife who has forgiven me. We sought counseling last year and have built a stronger marriage -- stronger than ever. "I will not mention any names but the woman who I was involved with and her husband were close friends and both of them worked for me. Our families were close. That closeness put me into situations which led to my inappropriate behavior. We caused deep pain to both families and for that I am sorry. "I am committed to my service in the United States Senate and my work on behalf of the people of NV. "Thank you."

Jun 16 2009, 6:56PM

The Invisible Primary, 6/16

Tracking the GOP race to 2012

John Ensign acknowledged an extramarital affair with an ex-campaign staffer; Bobby Jindal's state campaign organization has asked the "Jindal for President Draft Council" to end its efforts to draft Jindal for a presidential run; Eric Cantor called on President Obama to take a "strong public" stance on Iran's election and the ensuing turmoil; and Sarah Palin accepted David Letterman's apology for the controversial joke about her daughter.

Jun 16 2009, 6:56PM

The Day In Politics, 6/16

Today, we learned that Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) has backed Marco Rubio for Senate in Florida; Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) acknowledged an extramarital affair; and Rhode Island legalized medical marijuana stores.

We also considered President Obama's balancing act in commenting on Iran; the CBO's score of Sen. Ted Kennedy's health care plan as a gift to the GOP; whether criticism of the plan, and its score, are premature; another score of the plan; progress in childhood obesity; the difference between Obama's health reform push and President Clinton's; why Democrats aren't criticizing Bill Maher for criticizing Obama; as well as Al From's impact on the Democratic Party--and the GOP's need for some of the same.

More

Jun 16 2009, 6:09PM

Another Victory For Marijuana Reformers: Medical Pot Stores In Rhode Island

In the latest advancement for marijuana law reformers, the Rhode Island state legislature today legalized medical marijuana stores in the state, overriding Gov. Don Carcieri's (R) veto.

The new law will take effect immediately. Legislators voted in favor of the measure by wide margins on several votes today (vetoes of both House and Senate bills were considered in each chamber): 67-0 and 64-0 in two votes in the House, and 35-3 in both House votes.

Carcieri had vetoed the legislation on Friday.

More

Jun 16 2009, 5:36PM

Ahoy: Reports Say Ensign To Acknowledge Affair

The Washington Post, citing two sources, reports that Sen. John Ensign, a rising star in his party and a potential 2012 presidential candidate...uh, until now.... plans to publicly acknowledge an extramarital affair with a woman of unknown (to us) identity, very shortly.

Ensign, a member of the Senate GOP leadership, flew back to his native Las Vegas today in anticipation of the public announcement, sources said, missing a vote considered key to the Nevada tourist industry.

Two senior GOP political strategists, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive matter, said the announcement was imminent. They declined to say with whom Ensign had the affair.
Not much more to say on this subject, other than the usual public sphere / private sphere, JFK-Fifi-patriarchal-Clarence-Thomas-hearings-erase-distinction-Clinton-Lewinsky-Republican-moralizing-Larry-Craig-gay-people-David-Vitter talking points, which are kind of tiring.

Jun 16 2009, 4:46PM

DeMint Backs Rubio, Florida Becomes A Battleground

Conservative state Rep. Marco Rubio's U.S. Senate campaign in Florida has provided a rallying cry for conservatives, sparked a debate about the future of the GOP and the place of moderates, and pitted National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn (TX) against some of those passionate conservatives. Today, a prominent Senate conservative jumped on board with Rubio: Sen. Jim DeMint (SC).

More

Jun 16 2009, 3:24PM

Who Will Be The Republican Al From?

Tonight there will be one of those lavish Washington tributes. Speeches, toasts, gentle ribbing and fulsome praise--they'll all be on display at the Mellon Auditorium when Al From, the founder of the Democratic Leadership Council, retires. David Paul Kuhn has a smart piece today about how the Netroots and From's DLC have more in common than either realize. I'd add a few points.

More

Jun 16 2009, 1:15PM

Where's The Backlash Against Maher?

"We see our name in the paper a lot, but we're kind of wondering when you're going to actually do something." -Bill Maher on Barack Obama

Bill Maher has offered some scathing criticism of Obama of late, ranting against the president's televisional ubiquity and questioning Obama's political substance on his show, in an op-ed in the LA Times, and in an interview with MSNBC's Keith Olbermann.

But so far, Obama's backers largely have yet to speak up and deliver what the chattering classes might refer to as a smackdown to Maher for so harshly criticizing the president.

More

Jun 16 2009, 12:45PM

Health Reform, Then And Now: A Lobbyist On Obama's Coalition-Building Strategy

Julius Hobson, former top congressional lobbyist for the American Medical Association (AMA), says President Obama's speech to the AMA yesterday didn't articulate anything new--but that it's significant that Obama appeared before the group at all, and that Obama's coalition-builting tactics mark a notable difference from the Clinton-era reform push.

From a phone interview this morning:

I watched it when he was giving it, and I did not hear anything new that I did not expect to hear. What I thought was different was that he went to the AMA's annual meeting. No president has spoken to the AMA's annual meeting since, I believe, Ronald Reagan...

More

Jun 16 2009, 12:16PM

Another Estimate Of The Kennedy Health Care Bill

Another new score of the health care bill that will feature Sen. Ted Kennedy's name concludes that it will achieve its goal of providing nearly every American with health insurance, but not without significant costs.

The report, by HSI, a private health care consultancy, was obtained by the Atlantic from a Congressional source.

HSI estimates that 99% of Americans would have health insurance if the full provisions of the bill are made law. HSI, which has done work for insurance companies and for the presidential campaign of Sen, John McCain, also estimates that, with a so-called "public plan" attached, 78 million Americans would abandon their private health insurance plan for the public plan, which would pay providers using the Medicare-rate-plus-ten percent formula.

The group used the ACROLA method to score the plan, which, I confess, I don't know much about but which seems to be reliable, if broad.

I'm going to give short notice only to the HSI score of the cost of the plan -- $4 trillion over ten years --, in part because the draft released by the HELP committee doesn't include a number of revenue-enhancing or saving measures that we know will be included. Still, HSI estimates that ending the employer-sponsored health care tax exclusion would save, at most, $300 billion over ten years. That's the normal estimate.

So how does HSI get $4 trillion?  They're assuming that the bill ultimately subsidizes premiums for Americans making up to 500% of the poverty level, and that the public plan is robust and well-utilized.

Jun 16 2009, 12:15PM

Quote of the Day: Mousavi At Rally Monday In Tehran

I came here to invite everyone to defend their rights calmly.

Jun 16 2009, 10:50AM

CBO Report: Criticism Premature?

Media Matters For America e-mails to point out: "our new post highlighting the premature criticism of the incomplete, preliminary first-draft of the health care bill..."  Bolds in original. Yes, I get it. It's incomplete and preliminary. Yes, the numbers will change. That's not really the point here, at least from the perspective of those who want a health care to pass. It's the wisdom of submitting a partial bill to the CBO, whose numbers are treated as sacrosanct. And to be completely honest, it's not at all clear that the deficit projections reported by the CBO will significantly decrease when the HELP bill is submitted in its entirety, though the proportion of those covered will certainly increase.  Politicians have to pay attention to politics, and it's just bad form to have the CBO score your (admittedly partial) bill as deficit-enhancing on the same day the president promises that health care's going to be revenue neutral.


Jun 16 2009, 10:09AM

The Skinny: Childhood Obesity Rates Stable?

Sure, it's one study, but it now has the New York Times imprimatur, and the food industry is bound to trumpet it as a sign that their self-regulatory approach to the obesity epidemic is working. 

Since 1976, a Chicago-based research firm has been compiling detailed data on the choices kids make when they visit fast food restaurants. For the first time, the "bad" stuff that kids order is losing share (though not its top perch) to the "good" stuff.

In the U.S., rates of childhood obesity haven't increased -- or increased significantly -- between 1996 and 2006, according to a study by government researchers published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

More

Jun 16 2009, 9:51AM

The CBO'S Gift To The Republicans

"Repeat after me," TNR's health care wizard Jonathan Cohn exclaims, "This is only a partial estimate."  Cohn's referring to the Congressional Budget Office's preliminary score of the Senate HELP committee's health care plan. Cohn's exactly right:

But wait. The Senate HELP bill is not yet finished. Like the house design without the plumbing, wiring, and roof, the HELP bill is missing several key elements that would dramatically change the final estimate.

The most important of these, by far, is the employer mandate--that is, the requirement that employers either pay for their workers' coverage or pay the cost of covering them through a new insurance exchange, set up and run by the government. The HELP bill has a big blank in the employer mandate, because it was an area over which the committees Democrats and Repbulicans were still negotiating when the committee submitted its language

Let's extend Cohn's analogy. Imagine, if you will, that you're trying to sell another house on the block, and this ugly partially-finished monster sits on the lot next to yours. You certainly would do your best way to wait until the eyesore was finished -- and therefore was less of an eyesore -- before you brought potential buyers around.

Privately, most Democrats will tell you that the HELP plan is not the plan to watch in the Senate; that'd be the Finance Committee's draft legislation, due out very soon. So it might not matter what the CBO's HELP score is, even though elements of the legislation will be very similar.

But you can't blame the Republican Party for finding a way to exploit the partial release. Given the ease with which the CBO numbers are digested on Capitol Hill, the GOP now has a significant talking point, one that's reflected in news coverage already: the President says health care will be revenue-neutral, but the Kennedy plan in the Senate would add at least $1.3 trillion to the deficit...and wouldn't cover half of the uninsured!   Sure, the bill's a work in progress, but it could get worse, right?  You can see the ads now: a melifluous voice asking "Can we really afford to spend 1.3 trillion dollars?"

After reading the report, a senior Republican Senate aide e-mailed me: "So, the main things the President claimed today--it will be fully paid for, people can keep the coverage they like and currently have--don't seem to be operable under the current proposal."

The actual Senate Democratic proposal may differ considerably from the HELP plan, but this predecisional period is quite important so far as setting the contours of the debate. The president's defensiveness about the "public plan" option, his float of medical malpractice insurance reform and his insistence that Amercians who like their health care can stick with the status quo suggest that there is a greater political opening for Republicans than some polls might suggest.

White House officials wouldn't speak about the CBO score yesterday, but I can't imagine they're happy with the timing.

Jun 16 2009, 9:26AM

Sympathy As Policy

Writing for the New Yorker, George Packer observes that "[a]cknowledging the compelling voices of the desperate young Iranians who, after all, only want their votes counted, would not deep-six the possibility of American-Iranian talks."

It's an exquisite balancing act. On the one hand, there'd be penalties to pay if it appeared as if the United States were meddling in Iran's affairs. That would, after all, violate the precepts of Obama's vow of political non-interference, a centerpiece of his speech to Muslims in Cairo.

But administration officials who counsel the president to play it down the middle on the assumption that the current regime will be the future regime and the U.S. will be a stronger position to negotiate if it doesn't engage the opposition -- that might have it backwards.

The U.S. might actually have more leverage with the current regime if the educated middle class in urban centers, and particularly, younger Iranians, see the U.S as being on their side. Clearly, the government of Iran realizes it does not have the power and authority to govern without this group being somewhat pacified. 

We don't exactly know whether the opposition wants this, though -- we can't really interpret much from the handful of Iranians who gleefully use American-made twitter technology.

Even if the revolt/revolution/opposition is quashed and Ahmadinejad retains his position, some immodest talk by President Obama might strengthen the image of the United States in the eyes of young people all over the Muslim world and give these people more leverage with their own anti-Democratic regimes.

George W. Bush believed this with all his heart, but he lacked the credibility to give voice to these universal values, and a specific opportunity knocked.

The U.S. needs to find ways to build on Obama's speech. Speaking up -- as Obama did last night -- rather than staying neutral, is an expression of the principle of soft power -- winning the hearts and minds of the people of the world, rather than appeasing the powerful.

Jun 15 2009, 7:05PM

Useful Political Tweets Of The Day, 6/15

I tweet @marcambinder

Glenn Greenwald
: (@glenngreenwald): "Jane Mayer: Obama adviser John Brennan "wasn't just neutral;he was a supporter of using coercive interrogation techniques." http://tr.im/oA47

Salena Zito (@salenazito) "Obama deploying activists 2 spend summer vaca selling Obama care 2 u http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/blogs/fortyfourthestate/ "

HeyTammyBruce (@heytammybruce) Caroline Glick on Obama's "slavish devotion to his ideological canon that claims that no enemy is unappeasable" http://is.gd/12IuC

PlanetRomney: @PlanetRomney "#tcot Evangelicals for Mitt: INTERESTING PREDICTION: Mike Potemra over on the Corner, thinks Gov. Romney wi.. http://bit.ly/TD4mi

Jun 15 2009, 7:00PM

The Day In Politics, 6/15

Today, we learned that health reform backers have launched a new TV ad; Mir Hossein Mousavi officially won two provinces, according to Iran's government tally; Mike Huckabee did an interview in a comedy club; Iranian newspapers led with quotes from Ahmadinejad and Khamenei; President Obama addressed the American Medical Association; Russ Feingold asked Obama to reject the justification for President Bush's wiretapping program; the CIA released redacted descriptions of interrogations; and the CBO scored Sen. Ted Kennedy's health reform proposal.

More

Jun 15 2009, 6:15PM

The Invisible Primary, 6/15

Tracking the GOP race to 2012

The Palin/Letterman dispute has escalated with a push to fire Letterman from CBS; Tim Pawlenty; Mike Huckabee appeared in Iowa and warned Republicans against the "mushy middle"; he also sat for an interview at a New York comedy club; Tim Pawlenty tells Minnesota NPR that he'll announce which programs he'll cut this week in his $2.7 billion state budget fix.

Jun 15 2009, 5:43PM

Health Care: Prelim Score Of Kennedy Bill:16 Million (net) Covered; $1 Trillion Added To Deficit

Forget the OMB: the only legislative "scores" that really matter come from the Congressional Budget Office. Today, the non-partisan wonk office released its first, very preliminary analysis of the health care plan proposed by Sen. Ted Kennedy. 06-15-HealthChoicesAct.pdf

The good news: 39 million people would obtain health insurance coverage through the new health insurance gateways. But the plan, according to the CBO, would result in only a net gain of 16 million Americans adding insurance. That's because the CBO believes that the plan would kick about 15 million people out of the system because their employers would no longer offer insurance, and coverage from other sources would decline by 8 million.  The plan would add a trillion dollars to the deficit over 10 years.  An important caveat: the plan submitted to the CBO doesn't include expanded Medicare coverage guidelines and other measures that would serve as a safety net for those whose employers stopped offering health coverage.  This version of the bill doesn't include a "public plan," and it does not include the so-called "pay or play" option for employers. 

More

Jun 15 2009, 5:32PM

Redacted CIA Documents Of The Day: Interrogation Transcripts

Thanks to the ACLU, the CIA today released heavily redacted memorandums describing parts of the actual interrogations of Abu Zubaydah, KSM. Majid Khan, and Al-Nashiri. In the CIA's parlance, they are the verbatim transcripts of the combat status review tribunals (CSRTs) for these prisoners.  The documents have been released before, but there are a few de-redacted paragraphs that deal with allegations of torture:

Certain fragments, like this one, from Abu Zubaydah: "They say "this in your diary," They say "see you want to make operation against America." I say no, the idea is different. They say no, torturing, torturing, I say, "okay, I do, I was decide to make operation."  

KSM:  "l just make up stories, just location VBL. Where is he? I don't know. Then he torture me. Then I said yes, he is in this area or this is al Qaida which I don't him. I said no, they torture me.
Does he know you? I say don't him but how come he know you. I told him I'm..."

The prisoners' description of their interrogations are entirely blacked out.

Jun 15 2009, 4:50PM

Contrived Political Battle Du Jour: Dick Cheney v. Leon Panetta

The New Yorker's Jane Mayer spoke to Central Intelligence Agency director Leon Panetta on May 22, the day after President Obama and Vice President Cheney gave dueling speeches on national security policy in Washington. In the interview, Panetta said he disagreed with Cheney's contention that Obama's policies were making America less safe.

I think he smells some blood in the water on the national-security issue," he told me. "It's almost, a little bit, gallows politics. When you read behind it, it's almost as if he's wishing that this country would be attacked again, in order to make his point. I think that's dangerous politics."

Today, a spokesperson for Vice President Cheney responded in Cheney's name: ""I hope my old friend Leon was misquoted. The important thing is whether or not the Obama Administration will continue the policies that have kept us safe for the last 8 years."

Paul Gimigliano, Panetta's spokesman, responded in an e-mail: "The Director does not believe the former Vice President wants an attack.  He did not say that.  He was simply expressing his profound disagreement with the assertion that President Obama's security policies have made our country less safe.  Nor did he question anyone's motives."


I find the heat of this exchange to be manufacturered. Panetta said his piece a month ago. He didn't suggest that Cheney actually wanted an attack; "almost as if" is a provocative construction, but one that conveys the idea that the only thing that would prove Cheney's point would be a terrorist attack; hence it's "gallows politics;" an inherently unjustifiable and unprovable assertion that serves to scare people. To Panetta, that's unhelpful and "dangerous."  It's a subtle argument, inartfully expressed.

Panetta's response was fairly indicative of the administration's general thoughts about Cheney's speech, and Cheney's response today is quite measured.  There is really no conflict here; no argument; just provocative words among old friends about a very important subject, but words that, out of context and placed side by side, do nothing to further a debate or argument. 

Jun 15 2009, 4:34PM

Disputed Election, In Photos

The Boston Globe compiles photographs of the rioting, protests, and violence that have followed Iran's presidential election.

Jun 15 2009, 4:00PM

In Intelligence And National Security, Words Matter

Did President Obama's Director of National Intelligence declare that the National Security Agency's secret domestic wiretapping wasn't illegal?

Depends on the meaning of the word "illegal."  Blair, in his first speech since becoming the head of the U.S. intelligence community, told a reporter that the the program, known by the code word "Solar Wind," wasn't illegal. 

Think of Blair's institutional interest here. His National Security Agency still gets raked over the coals for carrying out the orders of the executive branch; the policy makers have already been drummed out of office, and whatever the NSA did, they carried out the law as it was construed at the time. Whether the legal rationale was appropriate is a different matter, and one that Blair isn't qualified to answer. You'll note that Congress later ratified much of the legal rationale while trimming the program of its excesses and instituting a new level of checks on the wiretaps.   An official familiar with Blair's point of view said that he did not mean to express an opinion on whether the program was "legal" in the sense of the interpretation-independent constitutional reality. He certainly did not intend to suggest that NSA employees could carry out surveillance was "illegal".

Most likely, Blair is just tired of the NSA getting stigmatized for carrying out the wishes of policymakers, even if he agrees that the policymakers circumvented the law. If culpability were to be ascribed to every NSA employee who participated in the program, had reason to know it was probably illegal and didn't blow the whistle (through mechanisms unknown to most NSA employees), then the government ought to prepare for 1,000 prosecutions or more.  
 
The problem with Blair's remark is more about the difference between the Platonic legality of the Terrorist Surveillance Program during the Bush era and the ability of policymakers to correctly discern the actual, real, answer to whether a certain practice is legal. It's a hallmark of the Obama era that reasonably certain truths are pursued openly, and that the preponderance of the evidence and scholarship outweighs the vagaries of an individual's interpretation of the law.  The Obama doctrine seems on first appearance very formalist in this way. The President made an example of the Office of Legal Counsel memoranda precisely because they so clearly violated this reality principle; the law was changed around to fit the circumstances. In Obama's world, there seems to be a capital-T truth when it comes to the legality of the program. And so Blair's acknowledgement of the old Platonic rationale was ill-advised.

Give with one hand and take away with another: the ACLU argues today that the Obama administration is changing the law to prevent the pursuit of justice... that it is using the mechanisms of the executive branch to prevent capital-A Accountability in order to lay the groundwork for a more lasting, more balanced approach to national security and civil liberties. 

Jun 15 2009, 3:46PM

Feingold: Asking Obama To Reject Bush

Since his election, President Obama has angered some opponents of his predecessor's use of executive power in the arena of national security. His administration's invocation of the state secrets privilege, his decision not to release detainee abuse photos, and his use of military tribunals to try terrorism suspects have all sparked the ire of the civil liberties community.

Today, Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) resurrected an issue that posed the same problem for Obama during the 2008 campaign: government wiretapping.

More

Jun 15 2009, 2:53PM

Will Health Care Crash?

There's been tons written about why this time is different than last time. The conventional wisdom has it that last time health care crashed because of the arrogance of the Clintons. A plan devised in secret, crazy in its scope, was presented to Congress with a take-it-or-leave-it disdain and the thing naturally failed leaving tens of millions of uninsured and incremental steps until now, when the Obama administration is supposedly doing the right things.

More

Jun 15 2009, 2:00PM

Obama's Speech To The Doctors

President Obama spoke to the American Medical Association (AMA)--the leading organization of doctors--today in Chicago, and the reception he got wasn't particularly enthusiastic. AMA is very skeptical of the kind of health reform some Democrats want--a public plan so strong that it could prove far superior to private plans and effectively lead to a single-payer system.

The Obama administration has shown flexibility on health reform, and it hasn't endorsed a specific plan as of yet. There are several proposals floating around in Congress, which include government-run insurance plans of varying strength. AMA has said it's open to some public plans, as long as doctors don't get paid less.

There could be some overlap between what Obama wants and what AMA is open to, but Obama has signaled that he wants his overhaul to be ambitious, and the weak public plans supported by AMA--plans that have no special advantage over private insurance and less power to bargain down rates, or an insurance co-op plan (which isn't public, but isn't run for profit)--would probably leave some on the left disappointed, perhaps even wondering why a Democratic president and 59 Democratic senators couldn't do better.

More

Jun 15 2009, 12:35PM

Iran Election: What Iranian Newspapers Say

While Western news sources have widely reported the protests and civic unrest that have followed Iran's election Friday, major Iranian newspapers today unanimously led with quotes from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, who praised Friday's election as a victory for Democracy and a blow to global oppressors.

Comment from Mir Hossein Mousavi, who has protested the results as a "charade"--and who reportedly appeared at a rally today today for the first time since Friday--was nowhere to be found.

Here are the top stories of three major Iranian newspapers. The websites of other major news sources available in English, the Islamic Republic News Agency (the government's main news agency) and Ettelaat, both timed out.

More

Multimedia

Jun 15 2009, 12:21PM

Huckabee Does A Comedy Show

Mike Huckabee gives an interview at a comedy club in New York. Topics of discussion: VP rumors, Tina Turner, and his book, Do The Right Thing, which shares its title with a Spike Lee film.

Jun 15 2009, 12:04PM

Dennis Ross's Future On The Iran Desk

Haaretz asks: "Why is Dennis Ross being ousted as Obama envoy to Iran?"

1. Ross, a veteran diplomat, was never envoy to Iran. He was a "special adviser" with responsibility for providing advice about the entire Middle East region (except for, um, a lot of other countries in the Middle East.) The U.S. government never wanted an envoy to Iran because an official appointment would signify that Iran merited the same official attention and respect as, say, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Obama's engagement policy is more cautious than that.

2. His position at the State Department has been tenuous and his status unclear; that's led to leaks and questions from his friends about what the heck he does.

3. He remains a valued adviser to the president, and he will probably end up serving in an advisory capacity at the National Security Council, where he won't have to fight political battles with Richard Holbrooke (who has hired Iranian experts for his staff) and others.

4. Ross may end up coordinating Iran policy at the NSC.

Jun 15 2009, 11:20AM

Follow The Developments In Iran Like A CIA Analyst

I've overdone this metaphor, but I really do see the panoply of sources we have about Iran as an intelligence service to the masses.

We've got reliable Humint -- on the ground sources. We've got open-source reports from broadcast and newspaper media. We've got analysis, in the form of great aggregation by smart observers.  We lack, um, signals intelligence, but Twitter is really a form of SIGINT, isn't it?  There's plenty of misinformation out there, like rumors that Ahmadinejad is going to stage an assassination attempt, so we need to be careful about how we judge the information.  If we're a savvy analyst, we need to be careful about the weight we attach to photographs and video accounts. They're the most immediate and emotionally powerful, but they can distort our understanding of the situation, particularly of about the importance of specific developments.

To start with, here's the raw data stream from Twitter, with the hashtag of the Iranian election. Remember, this data is unfiltered. There are some nuggets surrounded by garbage.  Follow the debates: "(I hear that NPR is claiming that it is false news that Mousavi is in crowd now. IT'S NOT! Tell them pp, we have pics!)" -- that's a real tweet. How would you evaluate it if you were on the Iran desk?

Watch for disinformation. There's a temptation to equate the size of one's twitter follower universe with authority, but that's not logical.  This source seems to have good information about Tehran's universities. I'd judge it as reliable because none of the other twitterers are arguing with its conclusions, and there is some independent corroboration for some of what it has to say.

Look for patterns in geography. But don't assume that everything that has the qualities of a pattern is actually a pattern.

Don't assume. Everyone assumes that Mousavi really won. But there is reason to think that the election was very close -- and that Ahmadinejad might have actually prevailed (although the evidence appears solid that his totals were significantly inflated.)   Don't assume that Ayatollahs who appear at protests necessarily support the protesters.  Don't assume that the Khamenei speaks for the rest of the council of guardians.  Don't assume that Iran's government had a plan to contain the protests -- or has a plan for tomorrow, ten days from now, or next month.

Look for sources that disprove your thesis. Go outside the country and outside your comfort zone. See what, say, China's news agency reports about the protests.  ("Iran's defeated presidential candidates Mir-Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi on Monday appeared in a car at a mass rally in Tehran that has been declared "illegal" by authorities, local Press TV reported.'")

Jun 15 2009, 11:12AM

Official Results: Mousavi Won Two Provinces

Nate Silver has the official results from Iran's Interior Ministry, broken down by province, as e-mailed to him from an Iranian studies student at the University of St. Andrews. Mousavi won just two provinces: Western Azerbaijan (50 percent to 47) and Sistan/Balouchestan (52 percent to 46 percent). Most other provinces, looking at the official results, were declared heavy victories for Ahmadinejad.

Jun 15 2009, 11:07AM

The Revolution Will Be Twittered

It's too easy to call the weekend's activities the first revolution that was Twittered, but when histories of the Iranian election are written, Twitter will doubtless be cast as a protagonal technology that enabled the powerless to survive a brutal crackdown and information blackout by the ruling authorities.

Had the revolution not been twitted, we'd still know about the misaligned election results, and given the hard work of traditional journalists -- ABC's Jim Scuitto, the New York Times's Bill Keller, a legion of correspondents for European newspapers -- the West would have some idea of the counter-Ahmadinejad protests.

The Twitter technology added two elements to this. Number one -- as Iranian authorities shut down internet servers, it allowed younger protesters, particularly those affiliated with universities in Tehran, to organize and to follow updates by Mir Hossein Mousavi; by spreading the word about the location of government crackdowns and the threat of machine-gun-wielding soldiers, it probably saved the lives of any number of would-be revolutionaries. We don't know how many Iranians belong to Twitter; there seems to have been about two dozen active voices from Tehran, but if we assume a multiplier effect -- these 24 people can coordinate with their 20 friends -- the use of the technology as a central organizing hub that circumvented official channels of communication cannot be understated. In this way, Twitter served as an intelligence service for the Iranian opposition. There are even hints that, once Iranian authorities figured this out, they attempted to spread misinformation via Twitter.

The second element is less important but more relevant to politics here at home. Given the popularity of Twitter with American political activists on the right and the left, and given the near-universal language of the Iranian twitterers' cry from freedom, it was almost inevitable that prominent political activists here would retweet and take up their cause. By the end of the weekend, a whole meta-narrative about media coverage had been created, complete with a #cnnfail hashtag; (CNN's response: debate the role of twitter.)

There is a now a rare and perhaps tenuous solidarity among left and right about Iran, a conviction that the United States government has to support the protesters, has to declare the election invalid, has to deny the action by the sovereign (albeit corrupt) Iranian government.  The position of the Obama administration is more cautious and calculating. As painful as the images of revolution may be, as heart-rending as the suffering of the Iranian people may seem, the principle foreign policy priority of the United States vis-a-vis Iran is about Iran's nuclear enrichment program. An administration official said over the weekend that the U.S. would talk to the government of Iran as it was, not the government of Iran that it wanted. Indeed, regime change is not and has never been part of the Obama calculus. In some ways, the public attention (and activist attention) being given to the Iranian opposition may complicate the administration's public diplomacy efforts.  The public will demand expressions of sympathy for the protestors, when Obama wants a stable government he can deal with.

As with every example of an election and its enabling technology -- Nigeria and cell phones, 2008 and the Net, 2004 and affinity organizing -- it's too simplistic to correlate one's preferred outcome -- in this case, the unsheathing of dissent in Iran -- with the effect of technology alone. As the sun falls in Iran tonight, there is fresh evidence that the mullahs who run the country are embarrassed at the worldwide outrage over their election. After spending the weekend in denial about the election rigging allegations, they've suddenly accepted an "appeal" from two of the challengers and will spend 10 days investigating the results. Perhaps that's designed to buy the regime 10 days of peace, but it will probably have the opposite effect.

Why hasn't Mousavi been arrested or killed? Iran's regime is thuggish, but I don't think it wants to risk further alienating Europe or China. And I surmise that because the Iranian government knows that the opposition -- maybe we should call them the silent majority? -- has ways of communicating and organizing outside of their control. Mousavi would become an instant martyr. Twitter, Facebook, blogs -- and the mainstream media -- are all colluding to keep hope alive for the Iranian people.

Jun 15 2009, 9:52AM

Ad: 62% Back Obama Health Care Efforts

After a Diageo/Hotline poll last week showed 62 percent of Americans supporting "the president enacting a major overhaul of the U.S. health care system," Americans United for Change will begin airing a TV ad highlighting the finding.

More

Jun 14 2009, 12:05PM

The Sunday Shows In Five Sentences Or Less

What you missed this morning...

1. VP Biden says U.S. has "real doubts" about validity of Iranian elections; insists that "he thinks" POTUS respects his views b/c he always consults with Biden before making a decision.  Sen. McConnell says he's confident that the Senate can force POTUS to keep Gitmo open.

2. HHS Sec. Sebelius won't say whether Obama would veto a health care reform bill that doesn't pay for itself; restates POTUS's preference for NOT taxing these benefits but suggests that a compromise can be had in the level of benefits taxed. On the public plan debate,  She calls Sen. Kent Conrad's "cooperative" idea "creative." 

3. Sen. Chuck Grassley is open to the idea of taxing employee health care benefits, but says POTUS must agree. Sen. Chris Dodd calls the idea "unnecessary." 

4. Ex-MA Gov. Mitt Romney, after all these years, defended his innovative health care system in Massachusetts, noting that it does not offer a "public plan" but has managed to reduce premiums by 50%.  Sen. McConnell calls the "public plan" a non-starter. 

5. Juan Williams calls POTUS's outreach to Iran "dead." Kristol wants Obama to support the demonstrators.

And everyone paid tribute to Tim Russert, who died one year ago this week.

Jun 13 2009, 10:55PM

Twittering The Iran Election -- And The Coverage

I've been following the coverage of the Iranian elections all day on Twitter; that'll continue tomorrow. I've got links to some of the best Iranian-based sources, and to the courageous American journalists, like Bill Keller and Jim Scuitto, who are finding ways to break through the Iranian coverage ban. I'm @marcambinder.  Sign up -- you won't get spammed, and you will get unfiltered insight. Also: Andrew has been blogging up a storm all day. Read every post.

Questions for the next week include: did the American media stand down? (I say no, but lots of other people say yes.)  What are Khamenei's intentions? How foreseeable was the plan to rig elections? Is it AT ALL possible that Ahmadinejad actually won by, say, 51%, but that his totals were inflated? Is the outpouring of protest (Green Revolution) more of an important development than the "re-election."?

Jun 13 2009, 8:40AM

Ahmadinejad Declared Winner--What Does It Mean?

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was declared a decisive winner in Friday's election--65 percent to challenger Mir Hossein Mousavi's 32 percent, according to Iran's state news agency--though Mousavi protested the results, alleging manipulation and fraud.

While it's unclear what the fallout in Iran will be--Mousavi supporters have already been disbursed with tear gas from around his headquarters--U.S. analysts have mixed opinions on what another four years of Ahmadinejad would mean.

Middle East Forum Director Daniel Pipes thinks we're better off with Ahmadinejad in office. The country's real power lies with its supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, not its president, he argues, and a Mousavi presidency would have lulled the world (and President Obama) to sleep in its dealings with Iran. Better to have Ahmadinejad, a hard-liner who more faithfully represents what Khamenei believes, and thus Iran's true nature.

More

Jun 12 2009, 7:00PM

The Day In Politics, 6/12

Today, the National Organization for Women condemned David Letterman's jokes about Sarah Palin and her daughter; Larry Summers defended his boss; and Organizing for America geared up for its big health care event.

We also considered possible outcomes in Iran, and what they could mean for the U.S.; an impassioned speech on gay rights from President Obama's Office of Personnel Management Director; Sen. Kent Conrad's health care pragmatism; what anti-obesity advocates can learn from the regulation of tobacco; Tim Russert, Matt Cooper, and the CIA leak case; Obama's affinity for DOMA; the GOP's looming Hispanic problem; the administration's state secrets claim in the Jeppesen case; and some corrections.

Jun 12 2009, 6:30PM

When State Secrets Aren't State Secrets

In the words of ACLU attorney Ben Wizner, a lead counsel on behalf of the five detainees suing Jeppesen Dataplan, President Obama now "owns the state secrets privilege." 

Wizner is correct. Remember precisely what it is that the government wants the 9th circuit to decide: that the U.S. government can dismiss any federal or civil case before it reaches the phase of discovery simply because the government asserts that the national security interests of the United States would be compromised if the case proceeds.

That's the same expansive state secrets privilege that presidents for 50 years have enjoyed -- but it's precisely the privilege that Obama, not two months ago, expressed an anxiety about: "I actually think that the state secret doctrine should be modified. I think right now it's over-broad."  Obama did not elaborate. During the presidential campaign, he criticized the use of the privilege as a justiciability doctrine to dismiss entire cases, rather than as an evidentiary doctrine, used to prevent the disclosure of highly-sensitive pieces of evidence.

Why is Obama hardening up his position?  If the privilege in weakened, it exposes the government to perpetual liability resulting from the mistakes of the past eight years. It would, in all likelihood, lead to a slew of civil cases brought by detainees against the government, cases that would require the government to litigate the practices of the past eight years. It would also lead to criminal cases. Obama has made it plain that he would rather focus his energies on reforming American judicial institutions rather than using the existing institutions to hold the Bush administration legally accountable for their policy decisions. 

The result is that many detainees who were tortured will be denied civil recompense. It does not overstate the case to observe that the full extension of the privilege would classify an entire category of Americans as being above the law. 

There is a larger push-and-pull at work. Does accountability require an actual struggle with the consequences of inheriting the mistakes of the past eight years? Or is accountability bound up in the changes in policies and law that Obama has proposed? What's the proper balance between these two competing claims to accountability?

I think that the Obama administration fears a Supreme Court battle over the state secrets privilege. It would undoubtedly be the signature case of the next term, one that would provoke an international uproar and a revolt from the president's base.  The conflict would be reduced to a sentence: will tortured detainees get justice?  I think that they hope that the 9th circuit will uphold the doctrine in a way that precludes an effective Supreme Court challenge from the plaintiffs. I think they are buying time until they can figure out a way to accept congressional legislation aimed at limiting the privilege.

So -- this case isn't really about secrecy. We know the secrets here -- they're contained in the testimony of the detainees and in numerous, repeatedly verified media accounts. If the case was really about secrecy, then the administration would be, in effect, contending that every secret is a real secret unless the administration acknowledges that it isn't. Jeppesen is a poor case to base a state secrets assertion on because so much is already known. It is the weakest of the several state secrets cases in the court system. And for that reason, the administration feels compelled to defend it.

Jun 12 2009, 5:45PM

The Invisible Primary, 6/12

Tracking the GOP race to 2012

In a day heavy on Sarah Palin news, Palin said she has made no decision on whether or not to seek reelection as governor in 2012; she also rebuffed David Letterman's offer to appear on The Late Show; and she alleges a political and media double standard in the flap.

Jun 12 2009, 4:04PM

The Atlantic's Boldest: Department Of Corrections (And Amplifications)

1. Harvard Law Professor Jack Goldsmith was the head of the Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice during part of the Bush Administration. He was not the head of any "council."

2. In using shorthand to describe Sen. Jay Rockefeller's version of a government-run health care plan, I may have given it short shrift and conflated two important elements. The Rockefeller public plan would follow the same guidelines that private plans in the health exchange follow. A new health trust would be set out outside the exchange, staffed by experts chosen by the Government Accountability Office. The trust would, according to Rockefeller's office, conduct surveys, review claims data, and rate plans on administrative expenditures, affordability, adequacy of coverage, consumer claims processing (including timeliness), consumer complaint systems, grievance and appeals processes, transparency and customer satisfaction. The ratings would be as simple as possible, with letter grades (A, B, C, D and F). All the information would be available online, on the same sites where people would choose their insurer.

3. I referred repeatedly to the State Children's Health Insurance Program as S-CHIP. In fact, the name has been changed and the "S" has been dropped. Legally, it's now CHIP -- the Children's Health Insurance Program.

4. In writing about the six conservatives and Republicans who get respectful attention from the White House, many of you wondered why I omitted Sen. Tom Coburn, who regularly discusses health care and spending matters with administration officials. They're right; I should have added Dr. Coburn to the second-tier list of folks.

Jun 12 2009, 3:20PM

Obama Holds On To State Secrets Privilege In Jeppesen Case

President Obama's lawyers asked a full appeals to court to rule on the validity of asserting the state secrets privilege to dismiss the now infamous Mohamed v. Jeppesen civil suit.  Here's a brief filed today:  mohamedvjeppesen_enbanc.pdf.   

The upshot: the administration is signaling that they're ready to take their arguments about the scope of the privilege to the U.S. Supreme Court. In April, an appeals panel for the ninth circuit ruled that the ALCU's lawsuit against the airline data company could begin the discovery phrase, rejecting the government's argument that the risk of disclosing harmful information was too great to allow the case to be heard in open court -- or in any type of court. Jeppesen helped the CIA plan its transfer of detainees to countries that later tortured them.

The Obama administration inherited the case from the Bush administration; privately, they argue that defending the sanctity of the privilege is necessary because if they relent, the privilege itself will be weakened, even as they concede that it has been used to prevent the disclosure of possibly illegal conduct by the former administration. In this case, the three-judge panel told the administration to assert the privilege during the discovery phase for whatever evidence it believed would jeopardize national security if disclosed to the defense. The government wants the ability to use the privilege to dismiss the entire case before it reaches the phase where specific evidence is exchanged and argued about. President Obama told reporters two months ago that he supported a more limited assertion of the privilege.

Mohamed et al. v. Jeppesen was brought on behalf of five detainees -- Al-Rawi, Binyam Mohamed, Abou Elkassim Britel, Ahmed Agiza and Mohamed Farag Ahmad Bashmilah -- all of whom contend that Jeppesen is complicit in their torture.

Jun 12 2009, 3:08PM

OFA Enlists Community Service, Grassroots Lobbying On June 27

Organizing for America (OFA) has been handling the officially sanctioned, DNC/volunteer-organized grassroots lobbying efforts for President Obama's health care reform push. Today, it's gearing up for the next phase: a national day of service for health care June 27. This will be the biggest action in support of Obama's reform efforts thusfar. It's community service, but it's also political: OFA's volunteers are doing this service, in part, to raise awareness for reform.

Here's what the events will look like, as described by OFA Director Mitch Stewart in an e-mail to supporters today:

More

Jun 12 2009, 3:07PM

The Coming Republican Reality Check

The usually wise and always engaging Mike Murphy has a piece in Time on a familiar there: the Hispanic woes of the GOP. The story he tells is familiar, of course. The country is becoming more Hispanic not just in the obvious states like Arizona and California and Florida but everywhere else, too. With Obama carrying Hispanics by a 35% margin--so much for the black-brown divide--the Republicans are screwed and will get more screwed until they come up with a message that appeals to Hispanics. Murphy rightfully notes that being pro life isn't enough to bring them into the fold. The party needs some kind of approach to immigration that won't scare off Hispanics and anyone doesn't tune into Lou Dobbs. The GOP's rejection of the Bush-McCain-Kennedy approach to immigration reform--not amnesty but a path to citizenship for those here illegally makes the comeback almost impossible. Dissing Sonia Sotomayor as unqualified or not that bright doesn't help matters for the Republicans.


More

Jun 12 2009, 2:35PM

Obama Admin Hearts DOMA (For Now). Do Gays Still Heart Obama?

Though pro-gay rights activists unaffiliated with the gay rights establishment have been increasingly vocal about their objections to the administration's allergy to quick action on gay rights, that establishment -- the major gay money players, the major gay rights lobbying groups -- have been largely silent. (Yes, a few of their spokespeople have made statements, but there's a difference between making a statement and taking a stand.) 

Obama won't fast track Don't Ask, Don't Tell. His administration isn't pressuring Congress to act quickly on gay rights initiatives. Obama has so far failed to find a way to grant federal benefits to couples with civil unions or state-sanctioned marriages.  

That might change.

Now, in a legal brief submitted to a federal judge, Obama's Department of Justice, writing in the name of the United States government, whose CEO is Barack Obama, argues that the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act is appropriate, carefully balanced and justified by reason, and not by animus toward gay people. A lot of the same rhetoric used to justify actual discrimination against gays is cited in the brief as a reason why DOMA is necessary. (Child abuse precedents, all of that.) The brief even resorts to the argument that DOMA doesn't deny gays anything because they're still entitled to all the benefits that heterosexuals get -- if they act heterosexually. The brief also suggests that gays accessing federal benefits will be free riders.

Needless to say, studied silence by gay groups, who have been counseled by the White House to be patient, seems to giving way to out-loud expressions of anger. (That this weekend marks DC Pride shouldn't be overlooked; gay people are in a mood to celebrate their status as persons.)

The Department of Justice insists that Obama wants Congress to change DOMA (he called it "abhorrent" during the campaign), but in the absence of a new law, the government is duty-bound to enforce the laws of the land unless they are clearly unconstitutional. This is the same argument the administration is using to justify its aggressive defense of the states secrets privilege. Joe Solomnese, the president of the Human Rights Campaign, said in a statement that if Obama wants to change the law, he should send legislation repealing DOMA to Congress. He won't do that.

Gay rights activists believe that Obama thinks the best way to fully integrate gays in the political and social fabric of the country is to do so by building consensus, rather than by setting an example that would expose the president to political risk. On Don't Ask, Don't Tell, the argument is much more subtle, but it follows the same theme. 

Here's Solomnese:

Mr. President, you have called DOMA 'abhorrent' and pledged to be a fierce advocate for our community.  As we approach the 40th anniversary of Stonewall, it is time for you to use your leadership to translate these principles into meaningful action.

The response from Obama aides has generally been a version of the following: Trust us. We're doing what we can. We'll get this stuff done. But it will take some time. We've got a lot on our plate.

"Note that the standard for defending a statute, once enacted, is lower than whether, in our judgment, it is constitutional," a senior administration official said. "It is whether there are arguments that can be made. The DOMA statute has been found constitutional by at least 6 courts and has never been struck down. Whatever we think, it would be pretty hard to say that there are not 'reasonable arguments' with that context."

Jun 12 2009, 2:21PM

Tim Russert, Me And The CIA Leak Case

He was a lawyer and too smart, too cautious to say anything. So he would just roll his eyes when we passed at the NBC News building on Nebraska Avenue or run into each other at parties around town. Tim Russert landed in the messy CIA leak case even before I did. Russert tragically died a year ago--too young, much beloved. I was friendly with Tim, through journalism and Pat Moynihan, and friends in no way that was particularly special except for one weird bond: We shared a legal docket and were scheduled to be put in contempt of court together.


 

More

Jun 12 2009, 1:17PM

Indulge This: What The Anti-Obesity Movement Can Learn From The Defeat Of Big Tobacco

Rep. Henry Waxman has been working to curb the effects of tobacco on American consumers for three decades, so it goes without saying that today's passage of the bill to regulate tobacco -- today's overwhelming passage -- is a personal victory for the long-time legislator from California. Waxman details his struggle to regulate the industry in a new book, The Waxman Report, that he co-wrote with my Atlantic colleague Joshua Green. Lest you think I'm shamelessly inviting you to sample the wares of a colleague, you're absolutely right. But the book's chapter on tobacco is relevant to many of the topics I regularly write about.

When Waxman came to Congress, tobacco was ordinary. That nicotine was addictive, and that smoking cigarettes led to numerous health programs -- well, everyone kind of knew that. The American Public Health Association had been crusading against the industry since the 1950s. But the political environment that greeted Waxman -- and tobacco's cultural role -- made it next to impossible to make headway on an issue that Waxman saw as an urgent public health crisis. He points out that the tobacco industry had extremely powerful and well-funded lobbyists in Washington, D.C., whereas the public health community couldn't catch up. He noted that the tobacco industry routinely encouraged members of tobacco-producing states to join the energy and commerce committee, which oversaw tobacco regulation, in order to water down anything that might come down the pike. Many members of Congress smoked. Addiction was considered a personal matter -- failure of willpower for those who smoked too much. Little attention was paid to the socialization effects of tobacco advertising and the aggregate costs to our nation's health care.

More

Jun 12 2009, 12:26PM

Larry Summers Defends His Boss -- And Previews More Interventions

National Economic Council director Larry Summers admits in a speech today that the "necessary fixes" to the nation's economic problems "come from the application of common sense in an area where complexity can blind sophisticated observers to the obvious."  Ostensibly, Summers, speaking to the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, is talking about the financial world's resistance to big fixes intended to mitigate the effects of markets that have crossed the line that separates managing risk and creating it.  Summers's role in fostering the expansion of the risk market -- and it being an opponent of regulating derivatives -- is presumably an example of how "complexity" can "blind sophisticated observers" like himself to "the obvious."  

But that's not the message. It's that the administration has a thoughtful approach to these interventions, that they were justified, and that they are being handled in the most effective way possible.

He is also laying the groundwork for the imminent of proposals to reregulate the financial system and create a systemic risk facility that would empower the government to intervene before major institutions fail.

Let me be absolutely clear at the outset about two aspects of President Obama's approach about which he has been particularly consistent and firm since the crisis began while he was campaigning for president:

The first is an unequivocal recognition that we only act when necessary to avert unacceptable -and in some cases dire -outcomes.  Barack Obama ran for president to restore America's role in the world, reform our health care system, achieve energy independence, and prepare our children for a 21st century economy..  He did not run for president to manage banks, insurance companies, or car manufacturers.  The actions we take are those of necessity, not choice. 

The second point on which the President has been unambiguous is that any intervention go with, rather than against, the grain of the market system.  Our objective is not to supplant or replace markets.  Rather, the objective is to save them from their own excesses and improve our market-based system going forward.

Jun 12 2009, 11:51AM

Sen. Kent Conrad And Political Reality

The Washington Post's Ezra Klein interviewed Sen. Kent Conrad about his proposal for state health cooperatives and concluded that Conrad "is very clear about the genesis of this proposal: The Gang of 11 -- the chairmen and ranking members of the Senate's health-related committees, which is to say, the Senate powerbrokers on this issue -- asked him to build this compromise because they don't think the votes exist to pass the public plan."

To underscore this point, Conrad gave the same interview yesterday to a bunch of health care journalists and reporters. He told Atlantic Media Political Director Ronald Brownstein:

    "Here's the reality we confront. In the Senate if there is the public option there is virtually no Republican support, and there are a number of Democrats who don't support it either. How do you get to 60?"
Supporters of Conrad's proposal point out that the idea had been discussed in the meeting that Democratic Senators had with President Barack Obama earier in the week. Conrad is nonplussed about the reaction from liberal health reformers who want a robust public plan to compete with and eventually crowd out the private insurance market. Conrad's point: that's not possible, given the political calculus now. If you can change the political calculus, you'll get the plan.

From the perspective of a liberal health care reformer, who's to blame for this state of affairs? The White House. They're not pushing back against Conrad. They're not arguing in private for a tougher public plan. (An insurance industry executive who talks regularly to the White House lauded the administration yesterday for its honest brokerage.) The other reality Conrad confronts is that even the majority leader, Harry Reid, acknowledges that the reconciliation process for passing budget items (50 votes needed only) would take care of, at most, 75% of the reform proposal, excluding most versions of a "public plan."  If you can't get to 60, then you don't have a bill. Sen. Max Baucus and Conrad are still opposed to reconciliation on principle.

Details about the Conrad plan are very vague. It's not clear, for example, that the federal government wouldn't have to be invovled at some level; there'd have to be some (potentially substantial) federal investment to get a national co-op up and running.

Jun 12 2009, 11:30AM

An Impassioned Speech About Gay Rights From Obama's Employment Chief

John Berry, President Obama's openly gay Office of Personnel Management director, gave an impassioned speech on anti-gay discrimination this week at the Department of Justice's (DoJ) awards ceremony celebrating Gay Pride Month, as reported by Government Executive. Berry, who has been a major player in employment policy before he entered the job, offered a particularly pointed criticism of the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy:
A good friend of mine was a colonel who honorably served in the Middle East. His sacrifice and risk of life was no less dear than anyone. I ask America, where do you stand--with this honorable service or with those who would make him lie to do so?
The Bush administration had stopped the DoJ celebration from 2003 to 2007, before Attorney General Michael Mukasey resumed it in 2008.

More

Jun 12 2009, 9:50AM

NOW Condemns Letterman

After this week's flap between Sarah Palin and David Letterman, which started when Letterman cracked a joke about Palin's "slutty flight attendant look" and another about her daughter getting "knocked up" by New York Yankee Alex Rodriguez, the National Organization for Women has condemned Letterman's jokes and is asking its supporters to write to CBS and voice criticism.

More

Jun 12 2009, 7:54AM

Four Iranian Outcomes, And What They Mean For The U.S.

Today, Iran will hold a presidential election that has brought voters to the streets nightly over the past week, young urban reformers clad in challenger Mir Hossein Mousavi's emblematic green, women with fingers dipped in green to show their allegiance, and backers of Iran's hard-line President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, dressed conservatively and wrapped in Iranian flags.

At stake in this election are many things, including economic policy, civil rights, and the tone of Iranian foreign policy.

In 2002, President Bush deemed Iran part of an "axis of evil"--and Iran has been a central focus of recent U.S. attention since, continuing America's long and complicated history with the country. If neither of the top candidates garners 50 percent of the vote, there will be a runoff on June 19, and we'll wait another week to find out who Iran's next president will be.

It's an election that's being watched by an international audience looking for insight into Muslim-world politics, with many observers hoping Mousavi's moderation will prevail, defusing the cultural and nuclear tension between Iran and the West.

More

Jun 11 2009, 7:58PM

Can Google Change Election Outcomes?

Outside of Virginia, there was little reason to notice that Creigh Deeds won the state's Democratic primary for governor. But here's something that political campaigns and marketers across the country should pay attention to: He did it partly with a technology called Google Blasting, an eleventh-hour strategy to blanket Google-affiliated webpages in an area with a single ad campaign to impact voters' final decision. This is now the second time in three months that a Democratic underdog has used Google blasts to seal a surprising victory. Goodbye robocalls, hello Google surges?

First, let's understand what happened with Creigh Deeds, who just a month ago was running a distant third in the VA primary. First the Washington Post endorsed him, creating a huge boost in northern Virginian support. But with most polls predicting a neck-in-neck race, even the outliers had Deeds in the low 40s. He ended up trouncing Terry McAuliffe and Brian Moran by more than 20 points, capturing 50% of the vote. How can we explain the incredible surge? Was it Google? The Washington Post lays out the argument:

Starting at 3 p.m EST Monday, hours before polls opened across Virginia, Deeds's campaign bought what's called a 'Google blast.' Or, more appropriately, a Google attack. If you live in Northern Virginia (or, like many voters, work in D.C. but live in NoVa), Deeds has been almost inescapable on highly-trafficked sites such as washingtonpost.com, the blog Talking Points Memo and Oxygen.com, which is popular among women. Capitalizing on his Post endorsement, he peppered those sites with banner ads reading 'The Washington Post endorsed one Democrat -- Creigh Deeds' until polls closed.
As Taegan Goddard's Political Wire points out, the same strategy was used by Democrat Scott Murphy in his upset victory in the New York Congressional seat vacated by Hillary Clinton's replacement, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand. In that election surprise, Murphy covered Google content network pages in the New York's 20th district with promotions, something operatives called a "Google Network Blast" or "Google Surge." Although most polls in the month leading up to his win had him behind, Murphy won the election by less than 1000 votes.

So how can this change elections going forward? I would wager that Google blasting works best in elections precisely like Virginia's Democratic primary for governor, when most potential voters had low barriers-to-persuasion and some might not even be aware of the significant differences between the candidates until a few days before the election. But maybe I'm overestimating the ability of voters to make up their minds early for major elections, too. I was consistently surprised to hear about the supposed legions of undecided voters in 2008 and anybody who has worked on a campaign knows operatives never underestimate the power of last-minute pushes in toss-up areas, like North Carolina and Missouri in 2008. An effective Google surge would like dispatching thousands of volunteers to paper entire districts with fliers, minus the eye-sore and littering. It's just one more reason to either fear Google or learn to appreciate its awesome power.

Jun 11 2009, 6:15PM

The Invisible Primary, 6/11

Tracking the GOP race to 2012

Today, Mike Huckabee attended an Arkansas fundraiser with former pro wrestler Ric Flair; Eric Cantor compared President Obama's economic policies to Vladimir Putin's; David Letterman has responded to the Sarah Palin flap; and Mike Pence discussed energy with CNBC's Larry Kudlow.

Jun 11 2009, 5:11PM

Useful Political Tweets Of The Day, 6/11

www.twitter.com/jaketapper  (@jaketapper): Re US govt enabling of obesity, I refer u to "How to Get Fat Without Really Trying" by late great Peter Jennings > http://bit.ly/12vTgd

www.twitter.com/astro_tim( @astro_tim)  Tweets in space: an Army Astronaut will tweet from the heavens.  

www.twitter.com/charlesdaney  (@charlesdaney)  Grossed Out? You Might Be A Conservative! - http://bit.ly/hoXUJ 

See also: Twitter 101 for health care journalists. 

Jun 11 2009, 4:57PM

But, Hey, The Stimulus Is Good

An administration official took about eight minutes before whacking me (gently) about my post on the Biden stimulus celebration tour. So let me be clear. I think the stimulus was clearly needed and probably should have been even bigger and more focused on the kind of construction projects that are being touted. My only beef was with the aesthetics of doing a victory laps with such frequency. But that said, I love a bridge repair as much as the next guy...

Jun 11 2009, 4:21PM

Cheat Sheet: The Public Plans

On the stump in Wisconsin today, President Obama insisted that opposition to health care reform was based on fears that government would eventually run the system and reduce patient choice -- and that such a major transformation was not in the cards.  "I don't want government to run stuff," he said. 

He suggested that a government-administered health care plan would be a last resort for those who couldn't afford or did not want a plan offered by private insurance companies. Whatever plan passes Congress is likely to include a mandate for Americans to purchase health insurance.

For most advocates, the purpose of a public option is to create an "ideal" health insurance plan that can experiment, can decide to pay doctors what it wants, can use what Rep. Henry Waxman has called "creative tension" to compete with private plans, and one that will ultimately serve as a mean toward which all the private plans move. A strong public plan would force private plans to negotiate lower rates with doctors and hospitals, which would reduce health care costs. A "weak" public plan would provide some competitive pressure, but would not be big enough to force the private plans to drastically change their models. Between these two ends, there are many options. Here are six:

1. The Schumer Plan -- would be a government-run plan that follows the same rules that insurance companies do. It would pay for itself via fees. 

2. The Conrad Plan -- would be a series of health insurance cooperatives, administered privately but not for profit. Details remain vague. The federal government would not directly be involved. 

3. The Rockefeller Plan -- would be a conventional, government-run plan that pays for itself via premiums and fees.Reimbursement rates would be based on Medicare for two years (at least), which could, in theory, pressure private plans to lower costs. The plan would follow guidelines that a new health care trust would create. This trust would function as a marketplace, giving providers and patients a sense of what other plans are charging and how effective they are. This is the strongest public plan offered so far by Senators.

4. The HELP (Kennedy) Plan -- still in progress, an early version would require providers to participate, would pay them 10% more than Medicare, and would also expand Medicare and S-CHIP.

5. The House Plan: Medicare would be expanded and eligibility would be based on income alone. The government plan would be modeled after Medicare; to get providers on board, there would be some (potentially significant) reimbursement rate adjustments. 

6.  The Snowe Float: for a few years, the government would offer a conventional, non-competitive plan. If insurance companies failed to reform, to cut costs, to improve quality, a much stronger, competitive plan would be offered. This is what's known as a "trigger" plan. 

Jun 11 2009, 4:00PM

Joe Biden's Excellent Tour

Joe Biden was on the road today. Along with Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and others, he was touting the benefits of the stimulus bill, this time at a bridge repair in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. He's also off to Kansas this week as well as Michigan.

You can always make the case for presidential barnstorming to promote upcoming legislation. President Obama is in Wisconsin today promoting health care reform. There's something a little tacky, I think, about taking victory lap after victory lap for something that you've already passed. Yes, the getting-America-moving tour probably has some psychic benefit for the economy and I'm all for that. But at a certain point a tour like this seems a little silly.

That said, is there really much debate about the stimulus anymore?

Multimedia

Jun 11 2009, 2:34PM

Letterman On The Palin Flap

David Letterman responds to the controversy over his jokes about Sarah Palin and her daughter.

Jun 11 2009, 2:05PM

Iran's Election: Just Like Florida In 2000?

At Foreign Policy, Karim Sadjadpour foresees a contested result in tomorrow's Iranian election, which pits current President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a populist with conservative supporters and a rural base, against foremost challenger and former Prime Minister Mir Hossein Mousavi, a moderate reformist with urban appeal.

More

Jun 11 2009, 1:58PM

AMA: We're Open To Some Public Plans

The American Medical Association takes issue with how the New York Times characterized their  stance on government-run health care options.

"Today's New York Times story creates a false impression about the AMA's position on a public plan option in health care reform legislation. The AMA opposes any public plan that forces physicians to participate, expands the fiscally-challenged Medicare program or pays Medicare rates, but the AMA is willing to consider other variations of the public plan that are currently under discussion in Congress. This includes a federally chartered co-op health plan or a level playing field option for all plans. The AMA is working to achieve meaningful health reform this year and is ready to stand behind legislation that includes coverage options that work for patients and physicians."

What this means: the AMA is open to any plan that doesn't force physicians to accept lower fees.

Jun 11 2009, 1:44PM

No Coincidence: WH Brings Fight To Nebraska

With news that health care reform advocates plan to spend millions on TV ads to pressure recalcitrant Democrats and Republicans to sign onto comprehensive health care reform, the White House is upping the ante on one prominent Democrat, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE).

Health and Human Services secretary Kathleen Sebelius plans a health care roundtable in Omaha, Nebraska tomorrow and will later tour a local hospital.

Nelson recently called the inclusion of a government-run health care option a "deal-breaker." This is how the White House returns the gesture.
             
A senior White House official said cabinet officials "never go anywhere by happenstance."

Jun 11 2009, 1:21PM

Why Obama's Speaking To The AMA Monday

The day after the White House announced that President Obama would be speaking to the American Medical Association convention in Chicago, the AMA let it be known that they'd oppose any "public plan" option as part of the new health care delivery system. The AMA speaks for some docs, but not a majority of them, and they're institutionally bound to oppose any choice that would automatically reduce fees for doctors. So why is Obama bothering to engage this skeptical constituency?

The White House believes that most Americans believe that the AMA speaks for doctors. And the White House wants to make sure that doctors are seen as being invited to the table. Engaging the AMA community makes it less likely that the AMA will oppose whatever health care legislation ultimately emerges from the House and the Senate in toto, which means that doctors aren't going to be counseling their patients on the evils of health reform. 

But the speech on Monday shouldn't be seen only in the context of Obama talking to doctors.   In fact, a senior administration official says, it's aimed at patients, convincing them that the status quo is untenable. (People understand the system is in crisis, but they're very skeptical about reform efforts because they worry they'll lose their choice of doctor and the quality of their care, if they have it.)   

Jun 11 2009, 12:52PM

Louis Brandeis, Federalism And The Changing Politics Of Tobacco

For those of us who covered the tobacco wars of the 1990s, it's hard to believe how much has changed. Back then, tobacco companies, fearful of lawsuits, were eager to forge a national legal settlement, passed by Congress, that would give them immunity from lawsuits. Prominent trial lawyers, like Dickie Scruggs, who is now serving time for attempted bribery, were key players in pushing the companies to say Uncle.

The idea of the settlement was that in exchange for legal immunity, they'd limit their controversial marketing, fork over billions to anti-smoking campaigns and generally rein themselves in. The national settlement fell apart. The Left wanted more concessions than the tobacco companies were willing to hand out and many on the right opposed the deal, too. Eventually a deal with state Attorneys General accomplished much of the same goals as the efforts at a federal deal. But for years one element of tobacco control that the Left craved had been missing: Regulatory authority by the Food and Drug Administration.

More

Jun 11 2009, 12:03PM

The GOP Energy Plan: Nuclear Plants, Drilling, And Prizes

When the budget fight got underway earlier this year, Democrats hammered Republicans for criticizing President Obama's blueprint without a plan of their own. Now, as House Democrats work on cap-and-trade legislation to reform greenhouse gas emissions--one of Obama's main domestic priorities, along with health care and education--House Republicans have crafted an energy plan of their own before the debate has hit full swing.

House Republicans unveiled their energy plan yesterday. It includes offshore drilling leases, 100 new nuclear reactors in the next 20 years (and an extended look at the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository), more Arctic drilling, and a $500 million prize for the first U.S. automaker to sell 50,000 cars that get 100 miles per gallon. Other prizes are included as well, administered by an energy trust fund.

More

Jun 11 2009, 10:32AM

GOP Doldrums

According to a Gallup/USA Today poll first written about yesterday, many Republicans are unhappy with their own party--38 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, in fact, view the GOP unfavorably.

Gallup has a more detailed breakdown of the numbers today.

More

Jun 11 2009, 10:05AM

Health Reform: Diagnosis, Cure, In Progress

That nyaaaaaaaah you heard yesterday was the sound of Republicans realizing that Democrats are pressing ahead with comprehensive health care reform a lot more quickly than they had previously anticipated. The frenzy of lawmaking has made it difficult for Republicans to try and frame the issue, and they're late to the game. We have a pretty good idea, at this point, of what the national health insurance picture will look like post-reform. And privately, Republicans are pessimistic that that they can gin up enough public anxiety to prevent a major transformation that reflects, in general, the Democratic Party's principals.

President Obama makes the broad case today, attempting to further kindle a sense of urgency (as if there wasn't enough already!), in a major, programmatic speech. And on Monday, Obama brings his case to the most ornery and important of constituencies: the American Medical Association... the doctors... (the AMA's members tend to be more skeptical than the average doc)... the folks whose decisions influence the system more than any other actors.

Here's a brief sketch of the state of play, as of today. Consider it a clip-and-save of what you'd need to know if you were asked to give a cocktail party encapsulation of the reform efforts.

More

Jun 11 2009, 9:54AM

Health Reform: Getting The Docs On Board

Jonathan Cohn takes you behind the scenes of negotiations between physicians groups and congressional health care reform legislation writers. The basic debate: docs -- at least the organized AMA docs -- fear that a Medicare-like "public plan" would mean, in the long run, significantly less money unless Congress artificially adjusts reimbursement rates. 

Meanwhile, public plan advocates in Congress aren't giving up. Over the past few weeks, according to sources, House committee staff have been involved in serious negotiations with representatives of various physician groups, attempting to win their overt support not just for reform but for a public plan option specifically. As an enticement, they've been promising to fix permanently the SGR problem--that is, the annually scheduled adjustment to the "sustainable growth rate" in Medicare, which threaten increasingly large cuts in physician payments before Congress inevitably postpones changes for a year. Reformers, including President Obama, have already talked about doing this; apparently, the offer the House Dems are making is to follow through on this and to make it a good, solid fix. (I say "apparently" because, while I've been told these discussions are taking place, I don't know the details.)

The AMA, according to the same sources, was part of these discussions. The fact that it has come out against the public option suggests, obviously, the talks aren't going that well. Still, a senior Democratic House aide points out the AMA's specific choice of language: A public option would not be "the best" way to deliver coverage. That's not quite the slamming the door, this aide says: "I see flexibility there."


So who speaks for docs these days? The AMA, weakened and defined as a conservative voice, is still the de jure voice, which explains President Obama's choice of venue. But plenty of other doctor's groups have reason to support public plans, particularly non-specialists and many specialist-generalists (i.e., oncologists who treat a range of cancer). Even if Congress can pass reform without the docs, they know they need to try to get the establishment to quiet down. Nothing was as damaging to health care reform efforts in the 90s as the organized effort by doctors to convince their patients that the government was about to ration care or force them to see another doctor.

Jun 11 2009, 9:00AM

Uighers, Four Of Them, Goin' To Bermuda!

A permanent vacation of sorts: the government of Bermuda (a.k.a, the "Department of Bermuda") has agreed to accept four Chinese Uighers, permanently, a day after news sources suggested that all the remaining Uighers would be settled on the island of Palau. The Uighers in question have been twice cleared for release by the U.S. government. China wants these folks back; the U.S. government worries they'll be arrested. Presumably, Bermuda has promised not to allow China to extradite the four men. The Justice Department noted in a statement that none of the Uighers that have been released -- five of them, not including today's cachement -- have engaged in criminal or terrorist activities since they were freed.

Jun 11 2009, 6:00AM

The Public Option

Republicans have warned that if the Obama administration pushes a health care with too much public coverage, it won't be bipartisan. Does Obama actually need GOP support, and can he win over skeptical Democrats? Will he succeed in passing a public option for health care?

Jun 10 2009, 7:00PM

The Day In Politics, 6/10

Today, we learned that the administration is creating a new Executive Compensation Special Master; that he'll oversee executive pay for seven financial and auto companies; J Street raised $22 K to defend a freshman congresswoman; the DNC wants you to sign Sonia Sotomayor's cast; and Gordon Brown passed over Mark Penn.

More

Jun 10 2009, 6:46PM

Details Of Senate Finance's "Public Plan" Are Released

Sen. Jay Rockefeller, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee subcommittee on health care, unveiled some details of what he calls a "strong" public plan that will be part of the finance committee's health care mark.
Rockefeller%20Consumers%20Health%20Care%20Act%20Background.pdf

Details remain sketchy. The plan will be offered to all employers and employees through the national health care insurance exchange. Its administrator, to be appointed by the president, will be firewalled from the various private options; he or she will be empowered to make the plan as competitive as possible. The plan will initially be small: it will be funded solely through the contributions of those who join it. The government will provide the same sliding subsidies for the public plan as they'll offer for the private options.

What's included in the plan? No details yet, although there will be plenty of coverage for preventative measures and the plan will experiment with various efficiency mechanisms.

The upshot: this is a "weak" public plan, not a strong one -- it's the type of public plan that the health insurance industry can deal with, because it's not going to be given extra funding or subject to fewer regulations by the government.

Jun 10 2009, 6:33PM

Use Political Tweets Of The Day, 6/10

A new feature. Posted occasionally. Can we keep it up? What are the odds?  Herein, USEFUL tweets of the day:

http://twitter.com/kristoff (@nytimeskristoff) "What I love about the Holocaust Museum is that it doesn't just record past genocide but fights it today, as a leader on Darfur."

http://twitter.com//noradnorthcom (@noradnorthcom) Up to date info on the NORAD training over Washington, D.C. So don't freak out.

http://twitter.com/MajoratWH (@MajoratWH) Fox's Major Garrett, now on Twitter.


Jun 10 2009, 6:00PM

The Invisible Primary, 6/10

Tracking the GOP race to 2010

David Letterman's jokes about Sarah Palin and her daughter--and Palin's response--made headlines in blogs and news outlets; Charlie Crist signed a health insurance reform bill; Eric Cantor said the GOP has a good shot at taking back the House in 2010; and Newt Gingrich finished behing Rush Limbaugh in a USA Today/Gallup poll on who speaks for the GOP.

Jun 10 2009, 5:36PM

Brown Passes On Penn

The Clintonism-is-Dead meme, gaining strength today after Terry McAuliffe's thumping in the Virginia governor's race, can draw some additional momentum from an item in today's First Read. Chuck Todd reports that UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown--who's staring at a McAuliffe-like thumping himself--has passed over Clinton pollster Mark Penn in favor of Joel Benenson and his firm Benenson Strategy Group. Benenson, of course, polls for Obama. Adding to the sting, all three principals in the firm--Benenson, Pete Brodnitz, and Carl Rossow--once worked for Penn, and left under less-than-friendly terms.

Jun 10 2009, 4:54PM

The "Special Master" Firms

The administration's new Executive Compensation Special Master, as Marc reported earlier, will be able to veto compensation plans for the 100 most highly paid employees at companies receiving "exceptional" assistance from the government--companies whose help has gone beyond that of regular TARP firms.

The firms that fall under that category, as laid out by a senior Treasury official in a conference call with reporters today, are: AIG, Citigroup, Bank of America, GM, GMAC, Chrysler, and Chrysler Financial. Their top 100 employees' pay will be subject to the Special Master's approval.

More

Jun 10 2009, 4:04PM

The Gun Debate, Again

This afternoon's shootings at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum are so awful as to defy credulity. A deranged white supremacist, it seems, started firing at the museum's entrance. When I came to the Atlantic's offices this afternoon, TV crews and a crowd stood outside of George Washington University Medical Center where one of the guards who stopped the gunman is being treated. Helicopters are circling the city. The overlapping police authorities are on display with law enforcement officials from the Park Police, FBI, District of Columbia and elsewhere. It's an insane moment and yet, I assume, we're just a few hours away from a very predictable debate over gun control.

More

Jun 10 2009, 3:37PM

A Google Surge For Deeds?

As Marc noted this morning, it's a mystery how state Sen. Creigh Deeds performed so well yesterday in Northern Virginia: he was supposed to be the conservative Democrat from a rural part of the sate, snatching up votes from counties similar to his own and leaving Terry McAuliffe and Brian Moran to vie for the votes in DC's Northern Virginia suburbs.

techPresident's Nancy Schola looks at a tech theory of how that could have happened: a Google ad campaign that targeted Northern Virginia IP addresses. Ads showed up on the screens of Northern Virginia readers of The Wall Street Journal, Martha Stewart Living, and The Washington Post--ads that highlighted Deeds' endorsement from the Post, which serves the Northern VA region--and Scola asks if this might have propelled him.

Jun 10 2009, 2:10PM

Sign Sotomayor's Cast

As Sonia Sotomayor hobbles around the Capitol on a broken ankle to meet with senators who will vote on her confirmation as the next Supreme Court justice, the DNC wants you to sign her cast--virtually, on a website they've set up for supporters to leave notes. The cast consists of a word cloud, generated by the site, of popular terms those notes contain.

Jun 10 2009, 1:28PM

Lobbying Group Defends Gaza Opposition With Cash

Can a freshman representative be unseated for opposing Israel's offensive in Gaza? Jewish leaders in one district and a pro-peace lobbying group are squaring off to find out.

Rep. Donna Edwards (D-MD), a freshman, was one of a handful of members not to vote "yes" on a resolution supporting the Gaza offensive (almost every representative supported it), the same day the U.N's Security Council called for an immediate ceasefire. Edwards said she favored the UN.'s stance.

Politico reported last week that it could pose a problem for her: Jewish leaders in her district were upset, and, as a significant chunk of her electorate is Jewish, their opposition could threaten her reelection chances. Some were preparing to back a primary challenger.

More

Jun 10 2009, 11:50AM

Does Sarah Palin Like Oil Revenue?

Sarah Palin told Sean Hannity, in an interview that aired last night, that she's glad oil doesn't cost $140/barrel, despite her state's reliance on oil for revenue, not just because people have to pay more for gas, but out of a basic belief in fiscal conservatism: "The fewer dollars that the state of Alaska government has, the fewer dollars we spend.  And that's good for our families and for the private sector."

Conor Clarke sees some hypocrisy in this, as Palin called oil prices a "double-edged sword" in a press release Monday:

More

Jun 10 2009, 10:55AM

Do Republicans Need Their Own Bill Clinton?

Via Andrew, Richard Posner isn't too worried about the country's leftward drift. In fact, he thinks that if Obama shifts America too far from the center, it will be good for conservatism, opening the door for a Republican Bill Clinton. But what would a Republican Bill Clinton even look like?

More

Jun 10 2009, 10:30AM

New Rules: Executive Pay Standards From Salary Sergeant

According to Obama administration officials, Executive Compensation Special Master (ECSM?) Ken Feinberg will be empowered to force new guidelines in the following manner: if he thinks that companies receiving "exceptional" assistance are paying their executives inappropriately, he can say no. He'll be given the authority to review the salaries and compensation regimes for the 100 most highly compensated employees at each company receiving assistance.

And that's basically it, until and unless Congress gives the administration the power to require that compensation committee members be independent from management and answerable only to the compensation committee. (This would give the SEC the ability to strengthen and streamline oversight.)

The White House plans to ask Congress to enact "say-on-pay" legislation to, in the words of a fact sheet,
"give the SEC the authority to require non-binding annual say-on-pay votes for all public companies." Non-binding, of course, is in the eye of the beholder: what company is going to be stubborn in the face of such political pressure and shareholder suasion?  

BTW: help me come up with a name for Ken Feinberg that isn't "compensation czar." It sounds too ordinary. "Special master" sounds too kinky. Maybe... "Salary Sergeant?" "Compensation Cop?" "Greed Guard?"

Jun 10 2009, 9:53AM

Why Deeds Won In Virginia: Five Theories

What accounts for State Sen. Creigh Deeds's last-minute surge of support and ultimately his butt-kicking victory in Virginia?  A few theories:

1. Macker fatigue. Terry McAuliffe's ads -- optimistic, programmatic -- were too effective early on. They reminded people that he's Terry McAuliffe... and maybe, just maybe, Virginians are over the entire Clinton orbit. (Check out how poorly he did in African American precincts.) McAuliffe is so thoroughly identified with the Clinton family among national Democrats that I would not be surprised if many a Virginia Democrat heard the Macker's accent and thought, ah, the Clintons are back. Speaking of accents: as Chris Cillizza points out, they matter in Vuh-gin-ya, and McAuliffe comes from Syracuse.

2. Geography. By refocusing his campaign message and targeting his appearances and events, Deeds was able to force McAullife and Brian Moran to split the regional vote in Northern Virginia, which allowed Deeds to maximize the effect of his non-NoVa, semi-rural base. The fact that Deeds won Northern Virginia remains a mystery when considering geography.

3. Doubt don't the power of influential newspaper endorsements in low-turnout primaries. Many NoVa voters were reminded of why they liked Deeds because the Washington Post so persuasively made the case for him.

4. Memories. Deeds is the one guy who ALMOST beat the Republican nominee, Bob McDonnell. Democratic primary voters know him and like him -- and, even though he's wonky and not the best communicator, seem to respect him.

5. Brian Moran. The guy who spent years waiting for this moment fizzled out fairly dramatically. Perhaps some Virginians are worried about the scandals associated with his congressman brother Jim, although I'm not sure how significant a piece of the puzzle that is. Certainly, Moran's obsessive focus on trying to tear down Terry McAulliffe may have worked in seeding doubts about the Macker...while telling voters nothing about Moran.

Jun 10 2009, 6:00AM

Iran Vs. Virginia

With observers looking to Virginia's gubernatorial primary for domestic political significance, and with Iran slated to hold its elections Friday, we ask: which election should Americans pay closer attention to?

Jun 10 2009, 5:51AM

The Six Top Republicans Obama Listens To

Regardless of whether the President's bipartisan outreach is producing legislative results, there is a handful of conservatives and Republicans that the president and his White House team respect. By respect, I mean, quite simply, the degree to which the White House responds to their worries and needs and believes that the time spent responding is useful and necessary. It is unclear whether the quality of this outreach differs from the respect accorded to Sen. Ben Nelson by the Bush White House.

The Mainers, Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe -- They don't ask for much, but they are among the first senators consulted by the White House on any major decision. Why? Their votes matter. In fact, so far as the White House is concerned, on major issues where a 60-vote supermajority is needed for cloture, they're the only Republicans who matter. Their every concern is heard by the White House.

Dick Lugar -- He gets as much attention from the White House as Snowe and Collins. He is close to Obama, having partnered with him early in the president's aborted Senate career to combat nuclear trafficking overseas, and Obama regularly consults with the Indiana Republican on matters ranging from defense appropriations to Afghanistan to Russia policy and loose nukes.

John McCain -- I've speculated that McCain's post-campaign frustration has limited his influence with the Obama White House. I'm wrong. McCain's imprimatur on major national security policy matters to the general officer corps is quite powerful and is a sign to the consensus foreign policy establishment (the post-Bush consensus) that Obama is acting respectfully. On Gitmo, torture, Afghanistan, and procurement reform, McCain's voice gets into Obama's head -- and that's the way Obama wants it.

David Brooks -- It's an open secret in Washington that White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel telephones the conservative New York Times columnist more than just about anyone else except for his wife. Brooks's columns have been quite critical of Obama as of late, which testifies to Brooks's independence and to Emanuel's sticktoitiveness. Their friendship predates the administration by many years, but the White House understands that Brooks's voice, even when not embraced by conservatives, influences how centrists and many intellectually honest liberal Democrats look at the world.

Harvard Law Professor Jack Goldsmith -- A former Office of Legal COunsel head in the Bush Department of Justice, his writings on terrorism and the law are often cited by the president's advisers in conversation, and the president himself has been known to cite his admiration for the way in which Goldsmith engages the problems from all angles -- political, legal, philosophical. Don't be surprised if Goldsmith ends up on a WH commission or task force at some point. So far as I can tell, Goldsmith is not yet in regular contact with the administration.

Others: Sen. Chuck Grassley, on budget and health care matters, as well as government operations; Sen. Orrin Hatch on health care; Sen. Mel Martinez on immigration; Govs. Schwarzenegger and Crist on policy matters, the environment and the stimulus; George Will; the National Association of Manufacturers (much more bipartisan recently) on labor and taxes; Sen. Lindsey Graham on detainee issues; Sen. Judd Gregg (still); what of Charles Krauthammer, who dined with Obama pre-inaugural? He's read...but not influential.

Jun 9 2009, 8:00PM

Deeds Runs Away With It In Virginia

For those of you who where praying for the Virginia Democratic Primary to end before Game 3 began, well, you're misusing the concept of prayer.  Theological quibbles aside, in an extremely low turn-out election, the Associated Press is calling the primary for  State Sen. Creigh Deeds, setting up a rematch with Republican nominee (and VA attorney general) Bob McDonnell.

To give you a short preview of the race in November: McDonnell is playing down the culture wars and playing up his ability to work well together with Gov. Tim Kaine (D).  And when they faced each other in "05, Deeds got the NRA's endorsement. McDonnell won after a recount confirmed a whisker-thin margin.  The voters of the state know and like both of these candidates well enough.

We'll have a bit more on this race later.

Jun 9 2009, 7:37PM

Useful Political Tweets Of The Day, 6/9

A new feature. Posted occasionally. Can we keep it up? What are the odds?  Herein, USEFUL tweets of the day:

http://twitter.com/ryanobles (@ryanobles) for coverage of tonight's primary in Virginia.

http://twitter.com/ktumulty (@ktumulty) Karen Tumulty, with a link to her piece on the House health care draft's "surprisingly" weak public plan option.

http://twitter.com/LawCues (@lawcues) What the Supreme Court's say in the Chrysler/Fiat merger means.

http://twitter.com/murphymike (murphymike) RIP, Ernest May

Jun 9 2009, 7:00PM

The Day In Politics, 6/9

Today, we learned that a Guantanamo detainee was transferred to New York for trial;Sen. Bernie Sanders said some Democrats will never support single-payer health care; and we welcomed Matt Cooper to the politics channel.

More

Jun 9 2009, 5:16PM

The Invisible Primary, 6/9

Tracking the GOP race to 2012

Today, Tim Pawlenty gets ready to make spending cuts and balance Minnesota's budget; Mike Huckabee's PAC sent out a fundraising e-mail pledging to help Bob McDonnell in the Virginia gubernatorial race; Huckabee will appear in Iowa tomorrow to raise funds for ally Bob Vander Plaats, a prospective 2010 gubernatorial candidate there; Haley Barbour will headline a GOP fundraiser in New Hampshire June 24; Sarah Palin's appearance at the GOP's fundraising gala last night caused little stir, but several headlines; Newt Gingrich keynoted the event; and Mitt Romney will discuss the Employee Free Choice Act at a forum in Delaware tomorrow.

Jun 9 2009, 4:53PM

Money And Criticism After Gingrich Speaks

The GOP took in a reported $14.5 million at its fundraiser last night featuring Newt Gingrich as a keynote speaker--not as much as in previous years, as the Associated Press notes, but a good chunk of change for the party's congressional and senatorial campaign committees. There's a flip side to this, one that often accompanies fundraising: criticism of who's raising it. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee jumped to criticize Gingrich's comment, made during his speech at the event, that President Obama's economic policies have "already failed," sending a press release to districts of target Republican congressmen highlighting the quote.

More

Jun 9 2009, 4:10PM

More PayGo: Will The Senate Follow The President's Lead?

The House of Representatives is generally considered the more profligate of the two legislative branches, but the truth, particularly when considering the fated history of Pay-As-You-Go budget rules, is more complicated.

Something important to keep in mind about Obama's PayGo announcement today: this is the first bill written by the White House and transmitted to Congress. For a White House that likes to make symbolic gestures, well, here you go.

Putting aside the Obama-crafted exemptions, the stimulus package and his budgets -- which is, um, everything, there is some evidence that the administration is intellectually serious about statutory PayGo. The director of the Office of Management and Budget, Peter Orszag, is credible on the subject. Obama has been a public supporter of statutory PayGo since his campaign days, and wouldn't you know it, but China is on the telephone with questions about the U.S. government's solvency.

More

Jun 9 2009, 3:35PM

The Return Of The Deficit Hawks

The Obama administration made a big deal today out of saying that it would adhere to so-called PAYGO rules, basically requiring that any new spending be accounted for. Having just thrown trillions of dollars at the banking crisis, mortgage crisis, auto crisis and this little thing we call the economic calamity, the sudden interest in fiscal rectitude may seem odd, but it's not crazy. Last week, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke warned that we can't keep all these stimuli going forever and before too long Washington would have to cut spending, raise taxes or both.

Still, the impatience with spending is growing. The Center for a Responsible Federal Budget, one of the leading fiscal scolds out there, took a shot at Obama's plan this afternoon.
"This is like quitting drinking, but making an exception for beer and hard liquor," said Maya MacGuineas, President of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. "Exempting these measures from PAYGO would increase the ten-year deficit by over $2.5 trillion dollars. That's not fiscal responsibility."

CRFB believes the President should strengthen his PAYGO proposal to cover all new non-discretionary legislation, and should accompany this with other reforms. The proposal should also be paired with discretionary spending caps, as it was when it effectively helped to rein in deficit spending in the past.

More

Jun 9 2009, 3:14PM

VA Primary: Following The Polls (And Why One Would Do So)

Virginia's Democratic gubernatorial primary is going on today, and though undue attention perhaps is getting paid, we may as well go ahead and look at the polling--because, well, it's fun to handicap elections, and with former DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe in this one, it's an especially fun race to contemplate, as gubernatorial primaries go.

Two polls released Sunday and Monday showed state Sen. Creigh Deeds making a big break away from fellow state legislative veteran Brian Moran and McAuliffe--though McAuliffe's internal polling shows a tighter race.

McAuliffe, the Democratic fundraising all-star, former front-runner in this race, and longtime Clinton friend had outraised Deeds and Moran combined by $300,000 as of his last filing, according to the Virginia Public Access Project, due in large part (~75 percent) to out-of-state contributions.

More

Jun 9 2009, 1:46PM

The Official Atlantic Politics Welcome Matt

Today, Atlantic Politics welcomes a new political voice to the page: Matthew Cooper, journalist and humorist, has covered politics for 20 years for the likes of US News, The New Republic, Newsweek, Time and Conde Nast Portfolio. He is currently is the editor at large of TPM.

He will be regularly blogging for the site.


Jun 9 2009, 1:37PM

Quote of the Day: Gingrich on Paganism

We are living in a period where we are surrounded by paganism.

Jun 9 2009, 12:43PM

Why VA Doesn't Mean Much

Salon's Mike Madden makes a good case for why Virginia's gubernatorial election (the Democratic primary of which is being held today) doesn't mean what political analysts and party operatives will suggest, hint, and hope it says about the national political landscape--including a purported rejection of Clintonism, the state of GOP competitiveness, and the importance of newspaper endorsements.

Jun 9 2009, 11:49AM

Cup-A- Instant White House Soup

The question about whether President Obama has too aggressive an agenda is relevant to academics who study the presidency and to opponents of the president's policies. It is hard to answer without clairvoyance. A corollary... is the White House devoting enough time and attention to each item of the president's agenda? That's a question I hear from allies of the president. Case in point: after a head-turning, potentially world-remaking speech to the Muslim world, the White House seemed to pivot the presidential megaphone in the direction of the health care reform debate. That was Friday and Saturday. By Monday, though, the notion that the president would begin to sell the public on the wisdom of a "public plan" this week was eclipsed by the sudden appearance of a gimmicky "Road to Recovery" slogan, part of a new campaign designed to sell the American people on the efficacy of a stimulus package that has already passed. 

The White House is very adept at exploiting the Michael Deaver code of presidential communication: the president should pay public attention to one major issue, per day; the structure of our media and democracy is bound to turn the president's words into a major story. Deaver's corollary insight was that the president's words didn't matter as much as the pictures, although the applicability of this nostrum to our post-modern, word-conscious times and our post-modern, word-conscious, narrative-obsessed president is unclear. 

The White House staff is capable of handling dozens of problems at once, and Obama's bandwidth seems to be broad. The recipe is just right. But at times, it seems like the administration is an early-season contestant on Hell's Kitchen, throwing everything into the pot at once...saffron, fennel and white wine, zucchini, tomatoes, croûton -- and hoping that the bouillabaisse tastes good. On days when the White House creates milestones -- the next phase of the recovery package -- or artificial deadlines -- we're gonna spend this much by this point -- the White House message seems contrived and counterproductive. Yesterday was Road to Recovery day; today is Pay-as-you-go budget discipline day. Tomorrow is... some other subject entirely. The television and print news coverage was skeptical, although, as the White House Office of Media Affairs will surely point out to me, the local coverage was a little better. But most Americans get their news from radio, television or online news sources first, and you'd be hard pressed to find a news story that was a PR slam dunk.

This isn't to say that the Dan Pfeifferian "long ball" dictum is bunk; officials in the West Wing seem to have an impressive ability to accept the daily ups and downs and keep their eye on the president's long-term approval ratings and goals. It's just that the quick head-snapping turn from subject to subject isn't necessarily the most efficient way to sell the president's agenda. Yesterday's Road to Recovery event may have reminded people that the government is spending billions to boost aggregate demand, but it also probably reminded people that the money is trickling out and called attention to exaggerated promises.  

The White House didn't choose the economy this week because they wanted to pick a topic. There is rising concern about deficits and an unemployment rate that is growing perilously closer to 10%. There is significant chatter on the right about an iron curtain of socialism that's been draped around the American economy. There is increasing worry that Obama might not be up to the job of fixing the problem.  And then there's the evidence that Americans are feeling more confident about the direction of the economy than they were a year ago, and that they still like and respect Obama's performance as president.

The problem and solution seem obvious: plan a week of events on the economy, get the popular president in front of the cameras, and double down on the investments already made. I think the White House has come to believe that a threshold has been crossed: enough Americans now expect economic progress. They understand that this deep recession will be long and that Obama bears no blame for its origin. But the deed has been transferred now; six months in to his presidency, it's his economy, and he'd better do something.

Jun 9 2009, 11:42AM

Taking Bets On North Korea/Journalists, Iran's Election, Energy Reform

Some interesting tidbits today on Intrade, the prediction market that takes bets on all things political, in addition to wine and art prices, with a reputation for accuracy:

- Intrade has begun taking bets on whether American journalists Euna Lee and Laura Ling will be released by North Korea before midnight ET on December 31, 2009--which is probably more interesting from ethical angles than political ones. So far, 172 bids have been placed, and the closing price is currently 75, indicating a market consensus that there's a 75 percent chance Lee and Ling will be released.

More

Jun 9 2009, 10:28AM

Sanders: Baucus, Dems Not Open To Single-Payer "In A Million Years"

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) has taken a leading role in health care reform efforts in the Senate this year, dedicating a series of hearings to it and, in doing so, becoming one of the more prominent health care figures in Congress.

Today, one of the Senate's most liberal members said Baucus specifically, as well as other Democrats in the Senate, wouldn't be open to a single-payer plan "in a million years." While President Obama's reform efforts are unlikely to result in a single-payer system, supporters of a stronger public option (not to mention die-hard backers of a single-payer plan) could take Sen. Bernie Sanders' (I-VT) comment as a bad sign of what one of the Senate's health care leaders is willing to entertain.

"What, am I gonna sit here and tell you Demcorats are perfect, they are immune from money, pressure? Of course they're not," Sanders said.

More

Jun 9 2009, 8:57AM

A Guantanamo Detainee Transferred To New York For Trial

In an early-morning news release, the Justice Department announced that Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, a Guantanamo Bay detainee since 2006, had been transferred to the custody of corrections officials in New York City and will stand trial for the 1998 embassy bombing in Tanzania. He's the first Guantanamo Bay inmate to be granted a federal court trial by the administration after a review of the Guantanamo Bay Detainee Task Review.

Ghailani appears in court this morning to face 286 separate counts stemming from his March 2001 indictment for terrorism and murder. Eric Holder, the attorney general, said in a statement that the "Justice Department has a long history of securely detaining and successfully prosecuting terror suspects through the criminal justice system, and we will bring that experience to bear in seeking justice in this case."  An accompanying fact sheet asserts that there are 216 people with ties to the "nexus" of international terrorism in federal custody.

Notice the date that Ghailani arrived at Guantanamo: 2006 -- that's after the reign of enhanced interrogation techniques had ended...after the torture that extracted (lots of bogus information and some accurate information) from his fellow detainees was put to an end. There was plenty of collateral information about Ghailani's involvement in the embassy bombings, and so the decision to grant him an Article III trial was probably one of the easier calls the administration had to make.

Jun 9 2009, 8:37AM

Why the White House Hates Process Stories

The fecund Monday news cycle almost made me miss a milestone of sorts: this White House managed to exist for nearly six months without experiencing the panic that a patented New York Times process story can produce. Jackie Calmes broke the streak (finally), with her piece on tensions among the administration's chief economic policy advisers. What makes the article all the more remarkable is the way the administration tried to contain what could have been a pretty damning pastiche of scenes from inside the West Wing.  They gave Calmes access to all the players and armed each one of them with the same message: acknowledge that Larry Summers is a bit of a character sometimes, acknowledge that brilliant people debating major policy in times of crisis often let off steam, but be faithful to the integrity of the process and respectful of your colleagues' contributions.

Had Calmes not been able to talk to Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner, or to Larry Summers, or to Christina Romer, the story would undoubtedly have had more of that snap-sounding impact. Calmes managed to advance a few good news nuggets, identifying the sides in key economic debates, hinting that Ben Bernanke might be reappointed as chair of the Fed, and taking readers into the debate over whether to rescue Chrysler.  Overall, though, one is left with the impression that, while Larry Summers might be as mercurial and hard-headed as always, he runs a pretty good National Economic Council process. Plenty of views are expressed, and openly -- and with a few exceptions, he welcomes the dissent. And in the end, and I think this is the saving grace from the White House's POV -- the President makes the decision and his team agrees to implement it.  No harm done.   Still, given the allergy of senior administration officials to process stories -- by no means an uncommon malady that afflicts White Houses -- one can almost hear the exhales that Calmes's story wasn't as bad as it could have been. At the same time, I can hear the gears clanging in the heads of those officials who make decisions about granting reporters access to decision makers: this...is...why...we...hate...process....stories.

Jun 9 2009, 6:45AM

Too Much Stimulus?

The "Roadmap to Recovery" is the latest public relations frame placed around the economic situation by the Obama administration. Critics are pouncing on what appears to be rising doubts about Obama's ability to fix the problems. The White House insists that the blip is temporary, and that Obama was always honest about the true state of the economy. It is also true that the White House sold the economic stimulus package as the first major step toward recovery. Did they fail to properly inoculate themselves by overemphasizing one fiscal policy? Are they making the same mistake twice?

Jun 8 2009, 7:00PM

The Day In Politics, 6/8

Today, we learned of Lakhdar Boumediene's treatment as a detainee; Sarah Palin said "told ya so" to President Obama's economic policies; Obama praised Lebanon's elections; the Supreme Court inssued a ruling on a judicial election eerily reminiscent of a John Grisham novel; College Republicans are trying to find their way; Iran is preparing for its election and the 2008 election saw $1.8 billion raised.

More

Jun 8 2009, 6:11PM

Pawlenty: Obama 'Misdirected'

Appearing on C-SPAN's Washington Journal, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R), a possible GOP presidential candidate for 2012, says President Obama's economic solutions are "misdirected," consisting of nationalization and higher taxes, and that they'll hurt U.S. global competitiveness.

Jun 8 2009, 5:22PM

The Invisible Primary, 6/8

Tracking the GOP race to 2012

Newt Gingrich will keynote a major GOP fundraiser tonight; bigger news, however, has been that Sarah Palin was uninvited to speak there in a series of ups and downs; a taped interview of Palin with Sean Hannity will air on Fox News tonight, in which she says, of President Obama's economic policies, "we told ya so"; and Tim Pawlenty compared the GOP to Eminem at the MTV music awards.

Jun 8 2009, 4:47PM

The $1.8 Billion Election

Thanks in part to Barack Obama's record-setting fundraising total of $745.7 million, financial activity in the 2008 election increased 80 percent from 2004 for a total of over $1.8 billion, according to the Federal Election Commission.

More

Jun 8 2009, 4:40PM

Chrysler Deal Stayed. What's That Mean?

From the Supreme Court:

Supreme Court of the United States
No. 08A1096
INDIANA STATE POLICE PENSION TRUST, ET AL.,
Applicants,
v.
CHRYSLER LLC, ET AL.
O R D E R
UPON CONSIDERATION of the application of counsel for the
applicants, and the responses filed thereto,
IT IS ORDERED that the orders of the Bankruptcy Court for the
Southern District of New York, case No. 09-50002, dated May 31 and June 1,
2009, are stayed pending further order of the undersigned or of the Court.
/s/ Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Associate Justice of the Supreme
Court of the United States
Dated this 8th
day of June 2009.

Did the Supreme Court just overturn the administration-brokered deal between Chrysler and Fiat?  No -- it just stayed a district court's order allowing it to proceed. Unclear whether the Court will decide to hear the case, or whether, after all the Justices have had a chance to read the briefings, it will unstay the stay and allow this to proceed.  Justice Ginsburg is probably being cautious here...she doesn't want to preemptively dismiss a case that might be constitutionally suspect -- and one that might set a precedent for future executive-legislative branch disputes. 

Jun 8 2009, 4:12PM

A Moderate Surge In VA

Tomorrow, Virginia's Democratic primary voters will go to the polls and pick their gubernatorial candidate. If current polling is accurate, state Sen. Creigh Deeds--the moderate/conservative in the race--will triumph over former state Delegate Brian Moran (a fellow veteran of the state legislature), and former Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe, the party fundraising all-star and longtime Clinton friend who was once the frontrunner in this race.

The winner will go on to face Republican Bob McDonnell in November.

Observers will look to the VA governor's race as a barometer of political sentiment in an off-year election; they will examine it as a tea leaf for the 2010 midterms, noting the significance of Virginia as a swing state, formerly in Republican grips but turning bluer in past years and falling, finally, in President Obama's column in November.

More

Jun 8 2009, 3:19PM

Tobacco: Why Not Obesity?

Major health problems associated with smoking account for about a tenth of our health care spending, about the same amount as illness and behaviors associated with obesity. Today, the Senate will vote to regulate tobacco like a drug and crack down on marketing. Costs associated with cigarette consumption will rise. A lot of folks wonder why the government can't borrow the tobacco approach and apply it to obesity, which also seems to be -- seems to be, I say -- a condition that results from an addiction to food? Arguably, the long-term costs associated with being overweight exceed those of nicotine addiction. Trouble is, obesity belongs to a different category of conditions. There is a social and psychological element to the smoking contagion, but its origins, effects and treatments are much more defined. 

Also, people can live without nicotine. They can't live without food.  And food advertising is already more tightly regulated than tobacco advertising. The correlation between tobacco advertising and consumption is much stronger than the correlation between food advertising and obesity -- so strong, in fact, that it's close to being unidirectional. 

Though policy makers are beginning to change their thinking, I'd wager that most still believe that obesity is, at its core, a condition that individuals ought to be able to control themselves. That's why the preferred response to obesity, so far, has been more study and prohibitions on lawsuits against the food industry. On the flip side, comprehensive national anti-obesity programs, like national nutrition labeling standards, are untethered to evidence that they work.   I'll be writing more about obesity and health care policy in the coming months, but suffice it to say that the tobacco model offers fewer clues for obesity treatment and prevention then one might assume.

Jun 8 2009, 2:16PM

Iran's Election, In Photos

Posters, signs, rallies: Iran's election looks sort of like an American one in photos taken by Zohreh Soleimani for the Financial Times.

H/T Atlantic correspondent Lisa Margorelli, who writes that in 2004, Iranians wanted to vote in the U.S. presidential election, but now it may well be the other way around.

Jun 8 2009, 1:06PM

College Republican Travails

Just as the Republican Party is going through a tough time at the national level, so too are the College Republicans: Lydia DePillis paints a slightly discouraged, disjointed picture of college Republicanism in a Slate story on the College Republican National Committee's recent meeting in DC.

Two points that most agree on: using technology and recruiting more blacks and Hispanics.

Jun 8 2009, 12:11PM

Out Of A Grisham Novel: Supreme Court Invalidates Judicial Election

Though the Supreme Court refused to hear a Don't Ask, Don't Tell challenge today, the more politically significant decision came in a five-to-four ruling that will probably change the way that judges are elected in the 39 states where jurists are held accountable by voters.

The court's center-left majority held that an "independent" $3 million bundled contribution orchestrated by Don Blankenship, the CEO of a coal mining company, to Judge Brent Benjamin -- one that helped get Benjamin elected -- appeared to be directly related to a case that Benjamin, as a newly elected State Supreme Court Justice in West Virginia, would preside over. The case involved a $50 million fraud verdict against the company. $50 million v. $3 million..... not hard to see why Blankenship would try his hand at electing a judge who would be congenial to his interests.

As Rick Hasen notes, the Supreme Court has been very reluctant to involve itself in state judicial elections until now, striking down attempts to limit contributions, donations and positions statements.

The facts in 'Caperton v. Massey' gave the majority a reason to find that

"....there is a serious risk of actual bias--based on objective and reasonable perceptions--when a person with a personal stake in a particular case had a significant and disproportionate influence in placing the judge on the case by raising funds or directing the judge's election campaign when the case was pending or imminent. The inquiry centers on the contribution's relative size in comparison to the total amount of money contributed to the campaign,the total amount spent in the election, and the apparent effect such contribution had on the outcome of the election."

In other words, there was reasonable evidence to infer that the company knew that the particular judge would handle the case, and because the contribution was so large, it crossed a threshold marking the boundary of democracy from that of an appearance of corruption. If this sounds like the plot of a John Grisham novel of recent vintage, you're right.

Judicial elections are going to change, now. How much? Don't know. That's one worry of the minority; Chief Justice Chief Roberts noted that the majority's inability to articulate a clear standard of what constitutions the appearance of corruption might mean that 40 different states adopt 40 different laws, which would mean that his court would probably be asked to figure out which ones were constitutional at some point in the future.

Jun 8 2009, 11:35AM

Obama Praises Lebanon's Election--But Not Results

President Obama offered a statement on Lebanon's elections this morning, praising their peaceful handling and voicing U.S. support for a sovereign, stable, and peaceful Lebanon. He did not, however, comment on the results.

Obama instead praised the democratic process in general, and he refrained from offering any congratulations to the U.S.-backed March 14 coalition on its victory over Hezbollah--perhaps looking to signal that democratic principles are more important to him than political parties, and perhaps, also, indicating a consciousness of accusations that the U.S. meddles in Middle East politics. (A visit to Lebanon by Vice President Joe Biden in May was specifically criticized as an attempt to intervene in yesterday's elections.)

More

Jun 8 2009, 11:13AM

Palin's 'Told Ya So'

The Drudge Report gets a transcript of Sarah Palin's appearance on Fox News tonight:

More

Jun 8 2009, 10:37AM

"Boumediene: 2, Bush: 0."

Jake Tapper conducts an interview with Lakhdar Boumediene, who spent seven years at Guantanamo Bay as a detainee, and under whose names legal efforts resulted in his fellow detainees being granted the Great Writ. Keep in mind: former Vice President Cheney and some other Bush administration officials believe that the evidence linking Boumediene to illegal conduct is stronger than the federal judge who released him did, but it would be, shall we say, quite foolish of the U.S. government to release him -- and the French government to accept him -- if they believed he intended to harm the United States. (A thought: if some folks like Boumediene had any respect for the U.S. before their detentions, they're probably angrier after... which may be one reason why so many ex-detainees seem to return to -- or being to engage in -- activities post-release which aren't salutary.)  For his part, Boumediene just wants compensation for seven years away from his family, and for the torture he says he recieved at the hands of U.S. interrogators. 

Boumediene described being pulled up from under his arms while sitting in a chair with his legs shackled, stretching him. He said that he was forced to run with the camp's guards and if he could not keep up, he was dragged, bloody and bruised.

He described what he called the "games" the guards would play after he began a hunger strike, putting his food IV up his nose and poking the hypodermic needle in the wrong part of his arm.

"You think that's not torture? What's this? What can you call this? Torture or what?" he said, indicating the scars he bears from tight shackles. "I'm an animal? I'm not a human?"

Note: HDNET broadcast an interview with Boumediene last week.

Jun 8 2009, 10:30AM

Pay No Attention To Those Numbers; Pay Attention To These Numbers

It's the second New Beginning for the White House in less than a week. Today, President Obama and Vice President Obama lay concrete for a "Road to Recovery" tour, which is supposed to highlight how quickly stimulus dollars are being spent. Suffice it to say.... even though this PR gimmick was planned for a while, if the White House were fully comfortable with how the stimulus package was playing -- and how well it was working, it would not be worth the President's time.  There is rising concern about deficits, both from the American people, who are naturally skeptical of them, and from Wall Street, which is pricing in the crowding out effect of dollars on investment. Unemployment remains stubbornly high, although the rate of growth seems to be slowing.  And the White House's efforts to sell the stimulus package as a success haven't worked; when, a few weeks, a similar "tour" was launched, reporters mocked the White House, and several assertions by the administration turned out to be incomplete or based on faulty information. A small fraction of the money has been spent. That's to be expected, given how complex it is to actually spend money, but the perception is hurting the White House, evidently, enough.   The buzzwords are: quicker, smarter, bigger. How will the White House actually accelerate stimulus spending?  Or will it attempt to convince people that the stimulus is working by traveling around the county and providing anecdotes?

Jun 8 2009, 10:14AM

Hezbollah's Defeat: A Victory For Obama?

As President Obama delivered his address to the Muslim world in Cairo last week, two pivotal Middle East elections loomed in Lebanon and Iran. The timing of Obama's speech was impeccable, from that standpoint, several days before Lebanon's (held over the weekend), and roughly a week before Iran's (to be held Friday), in which Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will seek to retain power against rivals that have criticized his foreign policy and handling of the country's nuclear program.

The Iranian election is perhaps more important for the U.S.: Iran is seen as the leader of an axis in Middle East politics, holding influence over its Syrian and Hezbollah allies. Iran's nuclear program is a growing worry both for Israel and many Arab states--it's a major issue in Middle East foreign policy.

The results from Lebanon's parliamentary election are in: the U.S.-backed March 14 coalition retained power over Hezbollah.

It's unclear whether Obama's speech had anything to do with it, but a Hezbollah victory would not only be eyed warily by Israel; it could be seen as a good thing for Ahmadinejad, with another anti-Israel, anti-U.S. regime prevailing.

The White House has been careful not to engage Ahmadinejad since taking power--despite Obama's campaign suggestion of more open relations with U.S. opponents--most likely because it doesn't want to legitimize Ahmadinejad before the election, in the hopes that he might lose, and that a friendlier president might take his place.

Obama's video message to the Iranian people was seen as an attempt to circumvent engagement with Iran's government--speaking directly to an electorate that could reject Ahmadinejad in June.

Today, the results of Lebanon's election may or may not be a referendum on relations with the West, with Israel, and the foreign policy ideals held by Obama. But they're definitely good news for the White House, and if there's anything to be gleaned about momentum in Shiite politics, it's moving in a direction that Obama probably likes far better than the alternative.

Jun 8 2009, 9:00AM

Grading Obama's Four Day Trip

He gave a great speech, banked some good pictures, notched up some favors with world leaders, and managed to keep the protocol nerds from going crazy.  But what did President Obama really accomplish overseas?  Here are five American goals and ten Ambinder grades - provisional, midterm grades, of course. As a humanist, my grading tends to get easier as the term progresses. I don't give many As. 

1.Reorient America's relationship with the Muslim world.  B+   There are at least three tracks here, and Obama rumbled along two of them: (a) - recognizing the validity of pan-Arabian / pan-Islamic identity (whatever incarnation it may take) and assuring this part of the world that America - Obama's America has no fundamental conflict with Arab nation-states.  (b) signaling a break with Israel and recognizing Palestinian suffering in a major way.  In some ways, the promotion of liberal humane values is at odds with the values of many Arab societies, and Obama couldn't really do more here than just claim that democracy and freedom could co-exist with Arab political culture. Inviting the Islamic Brotherhood to his speech was a nice touch, but they remain an illegal party in Egypt at the end of the day. Obama's speech isn't going to prevent Hosni Mubarak from ensuring that his son takes over the country. In some ways, Obama's decision to speak in Cairo sanctioned the validity of primogeniture. 

2.Connect with young Muslims around the world.  A - .  This goal flows nicely from the the last; In Syria, Jordan and soon, in Egypt, Obama will interacting with Western-educated heads of state who are his generational contemporaries.  And it this huge cohort (125 million or so) of restless younger Muslims - more exposed to secular values and Western culture - who wanted to hear the most about democracy, discrimination, education and freedom for women. And, of course, here is this guy with dark skin who was elected by America (still seen as a white country even though it isn't), who had no stake in the Iraq War, whose family has intimate ties to their religion - etc.  It's something
.
3.Take anti-Americanism off the table.  B.  Anti-American is real, in the sense that it is a genuine response to American foreign policy or culture, and contrived, in that it is magnified and exploited by elites in order to shift the focus from dislocation or illiberality or economic distress at home.  Whatever the admixture between real and contrived, it's out there, and something that Obama foreign policy advisers believe is a real obstacle to advancing even America's short term interests.  Make fun of the President for basking the adulation of tens of thousands of French citizens all you want, but if the French government (or the German government) or the Egyptian government try to trot out the old anti-American tropes, they'll seem disconnected from reality.  Now that anti-American is off the table, though, Obama's persuasive powers alone aren't going to be enough to convince Europe to share the burden of confronting or engaging with Iran, of sacrificing for the sake of the global economy, of the need to accept some of our Gitmo prisoners.  The sweep of Obama's foreign travels since he became President suggests that tamping down anti-American sentiment was the principle reason he took these voyages.  The next time he returns, he will have to bring something new - and something concrete, to these audiences.
 
4.Speaking truth to power: B-.  The specter of a Christian President, black, with ties to Islam, forceful condemning Antisemitism to an Arab audience - the Goldbergian conjecture - was quite something to behold.  But at the same time, Obama seem to endorse the political systems in Sunni countries. His criticism was dutiful and carefully worded, which is always a sign that he can't say everything he wants to say.   Some have read in his speech an equivalence between the Holocaust and the suffering of the Palestinians. I didn't read it that way, but it strikes me that many in the Arab world might well have - and that the construction of this passage was deliberately vague in order to allow readers to hear different things. It occurred to me a few days after the speech that Obama said nothing - and hasn't said anything - about American attitudes toward Islam here in the United States even as he bragged about how well integrated American Muslims happen to be.

5.Sending enough of a message of Israel, thereby purchasing, at the expense of Israel, some momentum in favor of dual-track (hard line / soft touch) diplomacy with Iran.  C+   We'll see. It's hard to conclude anything based on the comments of average Muslims to an AP reporter, in, say, Yemen, but if Obama did seed the idea in the Muslim world that America is willing (finally) to break with Israel, even if that break is on something as technical as the "natural growth" of settlements, he (arguably) advanced our national security interests. What's Obama going to do now? What's the follow-through?

Bonus! 6.The Rahm Question -  Was Obama American enough? That is, was his speech American enough in its orientation (not too Citizen-Of-The-Worldy) that it tracked with domestic political expectations?.     B+   The old refrain, at least to this blog: liberals like Obama because of what he does; moderates and independents like Obama because of what he says and how he says it.  Cheering crowds in Europe; applause in Cairo; glamorous pictures of the American presidential family; a sense that an American gave an important, consequential speech... this adds staples to the suture line between Obama and the independents who are giving him his margin to govern right now. 

Jun 7 2009, 3:01PM

The Sunday Shows In Seven Sentences Or Less

1. Secretary of state HRC says Obama passed the 3:00 am call test; notes that the prior administration accounted for the natural growth of settlement in an "oral" agreement, which isn't something the Obama administration signs on to; not worried that pressure on Israel with bring down the Israeli government.

2. Chief adviser David Axelrod says Obama will publicly promote / campaign for a public plan option as part of his health care reform advocacy this summer. 

3. the  news breaks that the White House will re-add North Korea to its list of states that sponsor terrorism;.

4.  Ex-Speaker/2012 proto-candidate Newt Gingrich calls Sotomayor not racist, but said she said something racist, or "racialist."

5. White House economic adviser Austan Goolsbee, on Fox News Sunday, proves that defending the administration's intervention in GM is not going to be easy 

Sunday's must read: The New York Times magazine's Matt Bai on Obama's congressional strategy. 

Jun 6 2009, 6:00AM

Organizing for America Kicks Off Health Care Campaign

Organizing for America (OFA), the Democratic National Committee-run vestiges of President Obama's campaign, kicks off its grassroots health care campaign Saturday with events in all 50 states--thousands of events held in places ranging from homes to libraries to community centers, with tens of thousands of attendees watching a message from Obama and discussing health care, OFA says--all organized by volunteers and OFA's field staff.

Saturday's events will be a precursor to a national health care day of service on June 27, and participants are encouraged to brainstorm for June 27 activities.

This marks the first major initiative for the group--and many will be watching and waiting to see whether it has an impact on President Obama's efforts to reform health care, as it seeks to become a relevant political force in shaping national legislation.

More

Jun 5 2009, 7:00PM

The Day In Politics, 6/5

Today, Mitch Daniels got more attention as a potential 2012 candidate; Newt Gingrich expanded on his criticism of Sonia Sotomayor; unemployment rose to 9.4 percent, with construction workers and black men seeing the worst of it; and the Justice Department launched an investigation into the shooting of Dr. George Tiller; and President Obama spoke about Middle East peace at a press conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

More

Jun 5 2009, 6:49PM

Obama: I'm Doing More, Sooner On Middle East Peace

President Obama, appearing in Dresden at a press conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel this morning, was asked what his concrete steps are to bring about an Israeli/Palestinian peace agreement. In response, Obama highlighted that his administration is doing more than the previous one--which was criticized for getting involved in Middle East peace late in the game--sooner in its tenure. From the White House transcript of the exchange:

More

Jun 5 2009, 6:33PM

The Invisible Primary, 6/4

Tracking the GOP race to 2012

Newt Gingrich and Mike Huckabee spoke at a Rediscovering God in America rally in Virginia Beach Friday, urging Christians to get involved in politics, and Huckabee said he was disturbed by President Obama's speech in Cairo; Huckabee will travel to Iowa next week to speak at two events; Charlie Crist is looking good in his Senate bid, according to a Strategic Vision poll; and Sarah Palin will appear in upstate New York tomorrow to celebrate Alaskan statehood at the home of William Seward, who negotiated the purchase of Alaska under President Andrew Johnson.

Jun 5 2009, 4:34PM

Justice Dept. Launches Tiller Investigation

While the political debate over the shooting of Dr. George Tiller focused on the speech of abortion opponents, the Department of Justice is launching an investigation into whether anyone else was involved with the shooting, investigating for potential violations of the Freedom of Access to Clinics Entrances Act--the law that prohibits threats of force or physical obstruction of reproductive health providers and seekers; threats, intimidation, injury, or interference with people exercising religious freedom at places of worship; and damaging or destroying clinic property.

"The Department of Justice will work tirelessly to determine the full involvement of any and all actors in this horrible crime, and to ensure that anyone who played a role in the offense is prosecuted to the fullest extent of federal law," Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division Loretta King said today in a news release.

Jun 5 2009, 3:24PM

Unemployment By Race, Gender, Class

At his Atlantic Correspondents blog, Richard Florida breaks down Friday's unemployment numbers by race, gender, and class. Construction and extraction workers (19.7 percent), black men (16.8 percent), production workers (15.6 percent), and those without a high school diploma (15.5 percent) have it worst, Florida finds.

Jun 5 2009, 2:59PM

The Idealism Of Mitch Daniels

Mitch Daniels promised Indianans Hoosiers* he wouldn't run again. When the Republican governor sought his second term in 2008, he told his constituents in a campaign ad:
"Whatever your outlook on politics, here's some good news: this is the last time you'll have to watch me in an ad like this. See, governor's the only office I've run for or ever will. I have no ambition except the one we started with--to tackle Indiana's problems head on and leave a better place to our kids and theirs. We'd like to devote four more years of hard work to strengthening education, putting a permanent lid on property taxes, recruiting new jobs, and making college affordable for all. Rehire us, and we will."
It's an unconventional strategy--one that taps into mistrust of politicians and their ambitions. And it worked: Daniels won by 18 percentage points, and went on to his second term as governor. In accordance with Indiana's constitution, he can't seek another consecutive term.

More

Jun 5 2009, 1:12PM

Palinomics

After Sarah Palin charged that the Obama administration's policies "fly in the face of principles" by creating debt and "defy Economics 101," Conor Clarke points out that Alaska gets lots of money in federal spending--more than it pays in federal taxes--and shares oil revenue state wide. Alaskans no doubt have Rep. Don Young (R), not Palin, to thank for a significant chunk of that federal spending, but it's an interesting point, and the chart certainly is cool.

Jun 5 2009, 12:49PM

The Upshot Of Sanford's Fight

Yesterday, South Carolina's Supreme Court ruled against Gov. Mark Sanford in his dispute over $700 million in federal stimulus funds, ordering Sanford to apply for the money as required by the stimulus bill. Sanford didn't want to accept the money because he saw it as an attempt by the federal government to force unfunded spending on the state; stimulus supporters, such as House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-SC), pointed to the state's economic woes and stimulus language that allowed state legislatures to circumvent spending-opposed governors, and said he should take the money, to be allotted for education.

"Political posturing doesn't educate our children or protect our communities," Clyburn said in April. That was mostly how stimulus supporters, and Sanford's critics, saw his resistance to the funds.

Though Sanford was defeated in court, the result could be worse for him. As a widely speculated 2012 hopeful, the governor has made his point about the stimulus funds--in fact, he has carved out a niche for himself as an anti-stimulus leader, and has won political points with conservatives in doing so. And it might be good for him that the fight ends here.

More

Jun 5 2009, 11:01AM

Gingrich Fleshes Out His Criticism

It's no longer just about racial prejudices for Newt Gingrich, if in fact it was at first, as his initial, controversial tweet calling Sonia Sotomayor a "racist" indicated. Gingrich has since walked the statement back in an e-mail to supporters, correcting his application of the word "racist" to the judge herself, rather than her words, making a more comprehensive case against Sotomayor's nomination.

The former Speaker continued to flesh out his criticism in an op-ed this morning, listing questions the White House press corps should ask Robert Gibbs about President Obama's nominee:

More

Jun 5 2009, 10:17AM

2012: Is Mitch Daniels The Future Of The GOP?

In today's Washington Examiner, Byron York prods into Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels' potential future as GOP savior and flag-bearer in 2012. As York notes, Daniels is immensely popular in his home state--in fact, his 69 percent approval rating is 16 points higher than Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty's, and his 68 percent favorable rating is six points higher than President Obama's. On top of that, he won reelection by a hefty margin of 18 points in 2008 even as Obama carried the state.

As Chris Cillizza points out, Daniels is a populist (*or, as a reader notes below, just a governor with an RV)--and populism is an interesting prospect for the Republican Party.

Ironically, his explanation of why he won't run, as he explained it to York, might make him even more appealing, in a post-political sort of way:
So Daniels is hot -- well, as hot as a Republican possibility can be at this moment. But press him all you like, and he'll swear he won't run for president. In Washington Wednesday, Daniels described staying out of the race as an almost moral obligation.

"A lot of what we have tried to do in this adventure has been to resolutely live up to our words," Daniels said. "I would like to leave my state a little less cynical than we found it because a group of people came and went and really did what they said. And this is one of those things. I said I was going to serve four years, I'm going to serve four years, do my best at it, and not be on the make for something else, as many people in public life appear to be."

Jun 4 2009, 7:00PM

The Day In Politics, 6/4

Today, President Obama delivered his long-anticipated speech to the Muslim world; Egyptian Twitterers said "trust, but verify"; conservatives abandoned the "apology tour" meme, even if they didn't like the speech; Palestinians liked it better than Israelis; a Lebanese Hezbollah MP said Muslims don't need a sermon from Obama; the White House bragged about Sonia Sotomayor's speed; and Ron Paul called on supporters to back his son's Senate bid.

Jun 4 2009, 5:30PM

The Invisible Primary, 6/4

Tracking the GOP race to 2012

Today, Tim Pawlenty has made two TV appearances since announcing he won't seek reelection, and he will discuss the future of the GOP with CBS's Bob Schieffer in a web-only broadcast interview; Sarah Palin warned that the White House wants to bail out debt-ridden states so it can "get in there and control the people"; and The Washington Post's Dan Balz chronicled the recent activity of potential 2012 candidates, includig Pawlenty's announcement, Mitt Romney's national security speech, Haley Barbour's scheduled trips to New Hampshire and Iowa, and Newt Gingrich's revision of his Sotomayor criticism.

Multimedia

Jun 4 2009, 5:07PM

Obama's Cairo Speech

Highlights of President Obama's speech to the Muslim world

Jun 4 2009, 4:53PM

Identity Politics

At her Atlantic Correspondents blog, Wendy Kaminer suggests the ACLU has unofficially endorsed Sonia Sotomayor based on idendity politics (the ACLU doesn't endorse judicial nominees, but Executive Director Anthony Romero mentioned his "veneration and personal belief in Judge Sotomayor" in a post to the group's blog), despite a "mixed" record of Sotomayor's rulings on the ACLU's issues.

More

Jun 4 2009, 4:39PM

The Collapse Of Trust In Britain

The collapse of public trust in was not brought about by one of Britain's innumerable and always slightly eccentric sex scandals.

It wasn't the government's convoluted response to terrorism after 9/11, or the more recent economic collapse (to which it responded fairly well) or the internal factionalism within the Labor Party pre-, during-, and post-Blair, or even the Iraq war ("sexed up" document, dead scientists, MI6 plots).

It was something much more banal: an accounting scandal involving moats, television sets, spare apartments, gardening expenses and a porn movie or two. For weeks now, the Daily Telegraph (or Torygraph) has been revealing the details of internal Parliament records of the expenses claimed by MPs in the performance of their official duties. The tipping point seems to involve a Dickensian character called Douglass Hogg. Resisting the temptation to write about his snout in a trough, let us just say that Hogg, MP for Sleaford and North Hykeham, was rather indignant in explaining why he felt it was appropriate for him to bill taxpayers for having his moat dredged, stables cleaned and piano tuned at his country house.

When the BBC caught up with Hogg, he protested that all of the fees were cleared in advance with the Parliament office responsible for such matters. That was true--and a bit beside the point. Hogg's excuse was simply that he expensed the items because he knew he could.

Hogg later repaid the $2200 pounds associated with the moat and announced that he would stand down from running for re-election. He did not want to further inconvenience the Tories, who have been better about getting ahead of the scandal than Labor, even though there is no discernible difference in the degree of culpability. Hogg was one of the first politicians to be exposed by the Telegraph. Dozens of others, including cabinet ministers, had their finances exposed to the light of day. The next major casualty was the Speaker of the House of Parliament, who tried, without success, to turn the story into an expose of the Telegraph.

As was the case in Watergate, the reaction topples the crime in the court of public opinion. The technical aspects of the scandal are less relevant; in Britain, MPs can get reimbursed for expenses associated with apartments they use for official business in London, and many of them seemed to abuse the privilege. This will remind readers in the United States of the House franking scandal in 1992, when dozens of members of Congress were found to have abused the privilege that let them send free mail to residents of their districts.

The response of Britain's government has been the real stick in the craw. Gordon Brown was slow to realize the public's outrage, and most politicians did not seem to put 1 and 1 together--that precisely this sort of attitude is exceedingly aggravating to voters when they are being asked to scrimp and sacrifice during a recession. Never before have MPs looked so out of touch.

Even though the guilty parties cross party boundaries, the Labor party is expected to suffer heavy losses in today European and local elections. This expectation has led to another classic British political expression: the symbolic pre-announcement of which cabinet members would be "sacked" after the election rout. For some reason, leaking this information is supposed to help the party in power. (Earlier today, Labor MPs circulated a petition demanding that Brown step down.)

Some commentators have questioned whether the parliamentary system can survive without significant constitutional reforms. This has been an obsession of Brown's, and if he retains enough stature and authority, he might be able to convince a reformist-oriented parliament to act. Everything remains on the table, including the creation of independent watchdogs to monitor MP conduct and even a provision for recalling wayward MPs.

It may not be enough to save whatever modicum of trust British citizens have in the institutions that governor their democracy.

Jun 4 2009, 3:55PM

Ron Paul: Support My Son's Senate Bid

You may not know this, but Rep. Ron Paul's son, Rand, is running for Senate in Kentucky, having formed an exploratory committee in May with the goal of taking over embattled Sen. Jim Bunning's (R) seat, as top GOP figures have privately urged Bunning not to seek reelection amid concerns that he can't win.

More

Jun 4 2009, 3:36PM

How Obama Governs Through The Press: Wolff's View

I have problems with Michael Wolff's essay in Vanity Fair, particularly his cold-hearted, unnecessary and inaccurate personal jab at a White House press official, but if you're looking for insight on the way the Obama administration manages the print press, you could do a lot worse.  My colleague Ron Brownstein likes to say that Obama campaigned on television and is governing through the New York Times. He means, as Wolff notices, that the Times -- still the most powerful star in the media firmament -- gets easier and better access to senior officials than anyone else.
In fact, it almost seems as though the Obama people have abandoned that grail of all White Houses, to bypass the mainstream media and go directly to the people, to get the message out, pure and unfiltered--which, with their millions of e-mail addresses and Twitter followers, never seemed so possible as now.

Instead, they're wooing The New York Times as assiduously as Pierre Salinger did on behalf of John Kennedy in 1962. And, perhaps not surprisingly, The New York Times woos back--rewarding the president with a lavishness of coverage not seen since, well, J.F.K. in 1962. It's an establishment lovefest.

It's some perfect re-creation of a relationship between president and news media that has not been seen since the White House pressroom was a clubby place with reporters invited into the press secretary's office for whiskey and cigars. It's cozy. Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod, who would have been, in previous administrations, the highest and most exclusive White House sources, have become almost casual quotes for the Times.

More

Jun 4 2009, 3:02PM

Quote Of The Day: Jeffrey Goldberg On Obama's Cairo Speech

An African-American President with Muslim roots stands before the Muslim world and defends the right of Jews to a nation of their own in their ancestral homeland, and then denounces in vociferous terms the evil of Holocaust denial, and right-wing Israelis go forth and complain that the President is unsympathetic to the housing needs of settlers. Incredible, just incredible.

Jun 4 2009, 2:45PM

Google Ads To Stalk Gingrich On Searches

Seeking to call attention to Newt Gingrich's scheduled attendance at a high-profile fundraiser for Republican Party committees next Monday, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) is taking out Google ads to be displayed in Google's "sponsored links" section next to results for searches on "Gingrich," "Sotomayor," and "DCCC" on Google. Googlers will see the ads on the right-hand side of Google's page after searching for those keywords.

More

Jun 4 2009, 2:19PM

White House: Sotomayor Does It Faster And Better

The White House today bragged that Judge Sonia Sotomayor completed her Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire in "record" time, besting by four the number of days it took for Chief Justice nominee John Roberts to turn his papers in. In a somewhat extraordinary blog post on the White House website, counsel Gregory Craig writes that Sotomayor's "historically fast completion" is "no small feat."  The idea is that the White House wants to speed up confirmation hearings; Republicans want to slow-walk them; Democrats want comity.

Craig's blog post also highlights several quotations from the speeches and documents that Sotomayor turned in. The first is a paragraph claiming fidelity to impartiality and the rule of law. To criticism that Sotomayor's writing ability is more workmanlike than Scalia-esque, Craig points to her "brilliance" and "commonsense" understanding of the law and her 17-year record.

Sotomayor's questionnaire will be available on the website of the Senate Judiciary Committee later today.

Jun 4 2009, 1:07PM

Obama: Open, Public Debate With Israel

As I noted in a post last night, there has been a quiet debate in Washington over the past month over how to talk to Israel: whether negotiations should be kept private or disagreements should be aired in public.

More

Jun 4 2009, 12:25PM

Hezbollah MP: Muslim World Doesn't Need Sermons

With Lebanon's parliamentary elections coming up on Sunday, and with a possibility that Hezbollah will make gains on the nation's Sunni-led, Western-backed majority that came to power in 2005, Tel-Aviv based columnist Samuel Rosner says President Obama's speech should be judged, in part, by the effect it has on those elections, and whether it can diminish the political strength of Iran-allied Hezbollah.

As Hezbollah-run TV station Al Manar reports mixed international reactions--as have other news agencies--one Hezbollah MP strongly criticized Obama's speech. From Haaretz:
"The Islamic world does not need moral or political sermons. It needs a fundamental change in American policy," said Lebanon MP Hassan Fadlallah of Hezbollah, referring to United States President Barack Obama's speech to the Muslim world.

Jun 4 2009, 11:36AM

Obama's Speech Plays Better With Palestinians

From reports this morning in Israeli news outlets, it is clear that President Obama's Cairo speech was better received by Palestinian leaders than by Israeli leaders.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas saw the speech as a good start toward new policy, and a Hamas legislator offered qualified praise.  From an Associated Press story posted at The Jerusalem Post:
"The part of Obama's speech regarding the Palestinian issue is an important step under new beginnings," said Nabil Abu Rdeneh, a spokesman for Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.

More

Jun 4 2009, 10:58AM

Cairo Reactions: Conservatives Go Past 'Apology' Meme

Some conservatives like President Obama's speech in Cairo--some didn't. But, while conservatives on the web had many things to say about the speech, many of them quite critical, the theme of accusing Obama of an "apology tour" seems to have dissipated in favor more more pointed, specific critiques.

The most popular criticism this morning is that the speech was dishonest and Obama revised history to promote a naive worldview. Here are some sample reactions from conservatives:

More

Jun 4 2009, 7:49AM

Tweets Around The World: Trust Obama, But Verify...

Lots of Egyptian tweets compared the speech to Anwar Sadat's address before the Israeli parliament in 1977. The prevailing attitude, though, appears to be "trust, but verify."  Younger twitterers in the Muslim world seem to be ecstatic. A lot of attention is being paid to his language ("Muslim communities" instead of "Muslim world."  Israelis seem to be upset; the settlers are irate.

Here are some reactions from my Tweeps:

@marcambinder We Israelis are going to be most interested in precise definition of 'continued Israeli settlements.' @ALKASOM

@marcambinder a call to obliterate our preconceived notions of what is possible in this world & an in credible tonic against cynicism @JEFFoAKLEY

@marcambinder Obama presses the re-set button; a sweeping speech aimed at bridging a deep chasm - but laid out no formal proposals or plans @WESTWINGREPORT

@marcambinder Obama showed himself to be a true world leader. He is inclusive, and his observations of shortcomings always include ours too CSREAD61

@marcambinder Wide-ranging, and lacking much of anything that will change anyone's mind one way or the other. No apologies, very evenhanded. @WSLACK

@marcambinder Excellent speech, and though I'm an Obama skeptic, I'm impressed by how Osama bin laden deemed Obama's speech a threat. @STINSON

@marcambinder Most exciting part of speech was reaction to govt transparency and will of the people. That's BIG w/ Muslim youth in Egypt. @GANESHPURI89

Here are other reactions, as compiled from the #cairospeech stream.

@queenrania (yes, that Queen Rania!) "An end to the Us-Them attitude? ... Obama's words: genuine & thoughtful. A much-needed change in tone re: east-west"

Elizrael: Likud MK Danon:"Obama signed a pact w/ the Arab world &gave a prize 2 Arab aggression, which has been going on 4 over 60 years"

BreakingNewsAP: Israeli settler spokeswoman says Obama's speech in Cairo was naive and out of touch with reality.

yacketeeyakking: RT @alexlobov: @sanasaleem ah well, when all is said and done, what else is there left to say but insha'allah?

kshaheen: It's funny watching the more pessimistic Arab commentators on TV get a lot of pushback after the speech

salmansqadeerRT @Elizrael: Israeli r-wing politicians attacked the #CairoSpeech, claimed it was "dangerous", exhibited "appeasement" & adopted Arab POV

alexlobov: @sanasaleem ah well, when all is said and done, what else is there left to say but insha'allah?

Jun 4 2009, 6:36AM

Obama's Speech: Top Five Quotable Phrases


On extremism and Islam:

Violent extremists have exploited these tensions in a small but potent minority of Muslims. The attacks of September 11th, 2001 and the continued efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile not only to America and Western countries, but also to human rights. This has bred more fear and mistrust.

So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, and who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. This cycle of suspicion and discord must end.

I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles - principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.

More

Jun 4 2009, 6:18AM

A "New Beginning"

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

(Cairo, Egypt)


EMBARGOED UNTIL DELIVERY 

June 4, 2009

 

Remarks of President Barack Obama

A New Beginning

Cairo, Egypt

June 4, 2009

 

I am honored to be in the timeless city of Cairo, and to be hosted by two remarkable institutions. For over a thousand years, Al-Azhar has stood as a beacon of Islamic learning, and for over a century, Cairo University has been a source of Egypt's advancement. Together, you represent the harmony between tradition and progress. I am grateful for your hospitality, and the hospitality of the people of Egypt. I am also proud to carry with me the goodwill of the American people, and a greeting of peace from Muslim communities in my country: assalaamu alaykum.

 

We meet at a time of tension between the United States and Muslims around the world - tension rooted in historical forces that go beyond any current policy debate. The relationship between Islam and the West includes centuries of co-existence and cooperation, but also conflict and religious wars. More recently, tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a Cold War in which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations. Moreover, the sweeping change brought by modernity and globalization led many Muslims to view the West as hostile to the traditions of Islam.

 

Violent extremists have exploited these tensions in a small but potent minority of Muslims. The attacks of September 11th, 2001 and the continued efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile not only to America and Western countries, but also to human rights. This has bred more fear and mistrust.

 

So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, and who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. This cycle of suspicion and discord must end.

 

I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles - principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.

 

I do so recognizing that change cannot happen overnight. No single speech can eradicate years of mistrust, nor can I answer in the time that I have all the complex questions that brought us to this point. But I am convinced that in order to move forward, we must say openly the things we hold in our hearts, and that too often are said only behind closed doors. There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground. As the Holy Koran tells us, "Be conscious of God and speak always the truth." That is what I will try to do - to speak the truth as best I can, humbled by the task before us, and firm in my belief that the interests we share as human beings are far more powerful than the forces that drive us apart.

 

Part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I am a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith.

 

As a student of history, I also know civilization's debt to Islam. It was Islam - at places like Al-Azhar University - that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe's Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.

 

I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America's story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President John Adams wrote, "The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims." And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, served in government, stood for civil rights, started businesses, taught at our Universities, excelled in our sports arenas, won Nobel Prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch. And when the first Muslim-American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding Fathers - Thomas Jefferson - kept in his personal library.

 

So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn't. And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.

 

But that same principle must apply to Muslim perceptions of America. Just as Muslims do not fit a crude stereotype, America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire. The United States has been one of the greatest sources of progress that the world has ever known. We were born out of revolution against an empire. We were founded upon the ideal that all are created equal, and we have shed blood and struggled for centuries to give meaning to those words - within our borders, and around the world. We are shaped by every culture, drawn from every end of the Earth, and dedicated to a simple concept: E pluribus unum: "Out of many, one."

 

Much has been made of the fact that an African-American with the name Barack Hussein Obama could be elected President. But my personal story is not so unique. The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores - that includes nearly seven million American Muslims in our country today who enjoy incomes and education that are higher than average. 

 

Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one's religion. That is why there is a mosque in every state of our union, and over 1,200 mosques within our borders. That is why the U.S. government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it.

 

So let there be no doubt: Islam is a part of America. And I believe that America holds within her the truth that regardless of race, religion, or station in life, all of us share common aspirations - to live in peace and security; to get an education and to work with dignity; to love our families, our communities, and our God. These things we share. This is the hope of all humanity.

 

Of course, recognizing our common humanity is only the beginning of our task. Words alone cannot meet the needs of our people. These needs will be met only if we act boldly in the years ahead; and if we understand that the challenges we face are shared, and our failure to meet them will hurt us all.

 

For we have learned from recent experience that when a financial system weakens in one country, prosperity is hurt everywhere. When a new flu infects one human being, all are at risk. When one nation pursues a nuclear weapon, the risk of nuclear attack rises for all nations. When violent extremists operate in one stretch of mountains, people are endangered across an ocean. And when innocents in Bosnia and Darfur are slaughtered, that is a stain on our collective conscience. That is what it means to share this world in the 21st century. That is the responsibility we have to one another as human beings.

 

This is a difficult responsibility to embrace. For human history has often been a record of nations and tribes subjugating one another to serve their own interests. Yet in this new age, such attitudes are self-defeating. Given our interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail. So whatever we think of the past, we must not be prisoners of it. Our problems must be dealt with through partnership; progress must be shared.

 

That does not mean we should ignore sources of tension. Indeed, it suggests the opposite: we must face these tensions squarely. And so in that spirit, let me speak as clearly and plainly as I can about some specific issues that I believe we must finally confront together. 

 

The first issue that we have to confront is violent extremism in all of its forms.

 

In Ankara, I made clear that America is not - and never will be - at war with Islam. We will, however, relentlessly confront violent extremists who pose a grave threat to our security. Because we reject the same thing that people of all faiths reject: the killing of innocent men, women, and children. And it is my first duty as President to protect the American people.

 

The situation in Afghanistan demonstrates America's goals, and our need to work together. Over seven years ago, the United States pursued al Qaeda and the Taliban with broad international support. We did not go by choice, we went because of necessity. I am aware that some question or justify the events of 9/11. But let us be clear: al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 people on that day. The victims were innocent men, women and children from America and many other nations who had done nothing to harm anybody. And yet Al Qaeda chose to ruthlessly murder these people, claimed credit for the attack, and even now states their determination to kill on a massive scale. They have affiliates in many countries and are trying to expand their reach. These are not opinions to be debated; these are facts to be dealt with.

 

Make no mistake: we do not want to keep our troops in Afghanistan. We seek no military bases there. It is agonizing for America to lose our young men and women. It is costly and politically difficult to continue this conflict. We would gladly bring every single one of our troops home if we could be confident that there were not violent extremists in Afghanistan and Pakistan determined to kill as many Americans as they possibly can. But that is not yet the case.

 

That's why we're partnering with a coalition of forty-six countries. And despite the costs involved, America's commitment will not weaken. Indeed, none of us should tolerate these extremists. They have killed in many countries. They have killed people of different faiths - more than any other, they have killed Muslims. Their actions are irreconcilable with the rights of human beings, the progress of nations, and with Islam. The Holy Koran teaches that whoever kills an innocent, it is as if he has killed all mankind; and whoever saves a person, it is as if he has saved all mankind. The enduring faith of over a billion people is so much bigger than the narrow hatred of a few. Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism - it is an important part of promoting peace.  

 

We also know that military power alone is not going to solve the problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That is why we plan to invest $1.5 billion each year over the next five years to partner with Pakistanis to build schools and hospitals, roads and businesses, and hundreds of millions to help those who have been displaced. And that is why we are providing more than $2.8 billion to help Afghans develop their economy and deliver services that people depend upon.

 

Let me also address the issue of Iraq. Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq was a war of choice that provoked strong differences in my country and around the world. Although I believe that the Iraqi people are ultimately better off without the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, I also believe that events in Iraq have reminded America of the need to use diplomacy and build international consensus to resolve our problems whenever possible. Indeed, we can recall the words of Thomas Jefferson, who said: "I hope that our wisdom will grow with our power, and teach us that the less we use our power the greater it will be."

 

Today, America has a dual responsibility: to help Iraq forge a better future - and to leave Iraq to Iraqis. I have made it clear to the Iraqi people that we pursue no bases, and no claim on their territory or resources. Iraq's sovereignty is its own. That is why I ordered the removal of our combat brigades by next August. That is why we will honor our agreement with Iraq's democratically-elected government to remove combat troops from Iraqi cities by July, and to remove all our troops from Iraq by 2012. We will help Iraq train its Security Forces and develop its economy. But we will support a secure and united Iraq as a partner, and never as a patron.

 

And finally, just as America can never tolerate violence by extremists, we must never alter our principles. 9/11 was an enormous trauma to our country. The fear and anger that it provoked was understandable, but in some cases, it led us to act contrary to our ideals. We are taking concrete actions to change course. I have unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by the United States, and I have ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed by early next year.

 

So America will defend itself respectful of the sovereignty of nations and the rule of law. And we will do so in partnership with Muslim communities which are also threatened. The sooner the extremists are isolated and unwelcome in Muslim communities, the sooner we will all be safer.

 

The second major source of tension that we need to discuss is the situation between Israelis, Palestinians and the Arab world.

 

America's strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied.

 

Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and anti-Semitism in Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust. Tomorrow, I will visit Buchenwald, which was part of a network of camps where Jews were enslaved, tortured, shot and gassed to death by the Third Reich. Six million Jews were killed - more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today. Denying that fact is baseless, ignorant, and hateful. Threatening Israel with destruction - or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews - is deeply wrong, and only serves to evoke in the minds of Israelis this most painful of memories while preventing the peace that the people of this region deserve.

 

On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people - Muslims and Christians - have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than sixty years they have endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations - large and small - that come with occupation. So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own.

 

For decades, there has been a stalemate: two peoples with legitimate aspirations, each with a painful history that makes compromise elusive. It is easy to point fingers - for Palestinians to point to the displacement brought by Israel's founding, and for Israelis to point to the constant hostility and attacks throughout its history from within its borders as well as beyond. But if we see this conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the truth: the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security.

 

That is in Israel's interest, Palestine's interest, America's interest, and the world's interest. That is why I intend to personally pursue this outcome with all the patience that the task requires. The obligations that the parties have agreed to under the Road Map are clear. For peace to come, it is time for them - and all of us - to live up to our responsibilities.

 

Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation. But it was not violence that won full and equal rights. It was a peaceful and determined insistence upon the ideals at the center of America's founding. This same story can be told by people from South Africa to South Asia; from Eastern Europe to Indonesia. It's a story with a simple truth: that violence is a dead end. It is a sign of neither courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children, or to blow up old women on a bus. That is not how moral authority is claimed; that is how it is surrendered.

 

Now is the time for Palestinians to focus on what they can build. The Palestinian Authority must develop its capacity to govern, with institutions that serve the needs of its people. Hamas does have support among some Palestinians, but they also have responsibilities. To play a role in fulfilling Palestinian aspirations, and to unify the Palestinian people, Hamas must put an end to violence, recognize past agreements, and recognize Israel's right to exist.

 

At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel's right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine's. The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop.

 

Israel must also live up to its obligations to ensure that Palestinians can live, and work, and develop their society. And just as it devastates Palestinian families, the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not serve Israel's security; neither does the continuing lack of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress. 

 

Finally, the Arab States must recognize that the Arab Peace Initiative was an important beginning, but not the end of their responsibilities. The Arab-Israeli conflict should no longer be used to distract the people of Arab nations from other problems. Instead, it must be a cause for action to help the Palestinian people develop the institutions that will sustain their state; to recognize Israel's legitimacy; and to choose progress over a self-defeating focus on the past.

 

America will align our policies with those who pursue peace, and say in public what we say in private to Israelis and Palestinians and Arabs. We cannot impose peace. But privately, many Muslims recognize that Israel will not go away. Likewise, many Israelis recognize the need for a Palestinian state. It is time for us to act on what everyone knows to be true.

 

Too many tears have flowed. Too much blood has been shed. All of us have a responsibility to work for the day when the mothers of Israelis and Palestinians can see their children grow up without fear; when the Holy Land of three great faiths is the place of peace that God intended it to be; when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed (peace be upon them) joined in prayer.

 

The third source of tension is our shared interest in the rights and responsibilities of nations on nuclear weapons.

 

This issue has been a source of tension between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran. For many years, Iran has defined itself in part by its opposition to my country, and there is indeed a tumultuous history between us. In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically-elected Iranian government. Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence against U.S. troops and civilians. This history is well known. Rather than remain trapped in the past, I have made it clear to Iran's leaders and people that my country is prepared to move forward. The question, now, is not what Iran is against, but rather what future it wants to build.

 

It will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but we will proceed with courage, rectitude and resolve. There will be many issues to discuss between our two countries, and we are willing to move forward without preconditions on the basis of mutual respect. But it is clear to all concerned that when it comes to nuclear weapons, we have reached a decisive point. This is not simply about America's interests. It is about preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that could lead this region and the world down a hugely dangerous path.

 

I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America's commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons. And any nation - including Iran - should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That commitment is at the core of the Treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I am hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal.

 

The fourth issue that I will address is democracy.

 

I know there has been controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent years, and much of this controversy is connected to the war in Iraq. So let me be clear: no system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other. 

 

That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect the will of the people. Each nation gives life to this principle in its own way, grounded in the traditions of its own people. America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election. But I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn't steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. Those are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere.

 

There is no straight line to realize this promise. But this much is clear: governments that protect these rights are ultimately more stable, successful and secure. Suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. America respects the right of all peaceful and law-abiding voices to be heard around the world, even if we disagree with them. And we will welcome all elected, peaceful governments - provided they govern with respect for all their people.

 

This last point is important because there are some who advocate for democracy only when they are out of power; once in power, they are ruthless in suppressing the rights of others. No matter where it takes hold, government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who hold power: you must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy.

 

The fifth issue that we must address together is religious freedom.

 

Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. We see it in the history of Andalusia and Cordoba during the Inquisition. I saw it firsthand as a child in Indonesia, where devout Christians worshiped freely in an overwhelmingly Muslim country. That is the spirit we need today. People in every country should be free to choose and live their faith based upon the persuasion of the mind, heart, and soul. This tolerance is essential for religion to thrive, but it is being challenged in many different ways.

 

Among some Muslims, there is a disturbing tendency to measure one's own faith by the rejection of another's. The richness of religious diversity must be upheld - whether it is for Maronites in Lebanon or the Copts in Egypt. And fault lines must be closed among Muslims as well, as the divisions between Sunni and Shia have led to tragic violence, particularly in Iraq.

 

Freedom of religion is central to the ability of peoples to live together. We must always examine the ways in which we protect it. For instance, in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation. That is why I am committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfill zakat. 

 

Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit - for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We cannot disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretence of liberalism.

 

Indeed, faith should bring us together. That is why we are forging service projects in America that bring together Christians, Muslims, and Jews. That is why we welcome efforts like Saudi Arabian King Abdullah's Interfaith dialogue and Turkey's leadership in the Alliance of Civilizations. Around the world, we can turn dialogue into Interfaith service, so bridges between peoples lead to action - whether it is combating malaria in Africa, or providing relief after a natural disaster. 

 

The sixth issue that I want to address is women's rights.

 

I know there is debate about this issue. I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality. And it is no coincidence that countries where women are well-educated are far more likely to be prosperous.

 

Now let me be clear: issues of women's equality are by no means simply an issue for Islam. In Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia, we have seen Muslim-majority countries elect a woman to lead. Meanwhile, the struggle for women's equality continues in many aspects of American life, and in countries around the world.

 

Our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons, and our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity - men and women - to reach their full potential. I do not believe that women must make the same choices as men in order to be equal, and I respect those women who choose to live their lives in traditional roles. But it should be their choice. That is why the United States will partner with any Muslim-majority country to support expanded literacy for girls, and to help young women pursue employment through micro-financing that helps people live their dreams.

 

Finally, I want to discuss economic development and opportunity.

 

I know that for many, the face of globalization is contradictory. The Internet and television can bring knowledge and information, but also offensive sexuality and mindless violence. Trade can bring new wealth and opportunities, but also huge disruptions and changing communities. In all nations - including my own - this change can bring fear. Fear that because of modernity we will lose of control over our economic choices, our politics, and most importantly our identities - those things we most cherish about our communities, our families, our traditions, and our faith. 

 

But I also know that human progress cannot be denied. There need not be contradiction between development and tradition. Countries like Japan and South Korea grew their economies while maintaining distinct cultures. The same is true for the astonishing progress within Muslim-majority countries from Kuala Lumpur to Dubai. In ancient times and in our times, Muslim communities have been at the forefront of innovation and education.

 

This is important because no development strategy can be based only upon what comes out of the ground, nor can it be sustained while young people are out of work. Many Gulf States have enjoyed great wealth as a consequence of oil, and some are beginning to focus it on broader development. But all of us must recognize that education and innovation will be the currency of the 21st century, and in too many Muslim communities there remains underinvestment in these areas. I am emphasizing such investments within my country. And while America in the past has focused on oil and gas in this part of the world, we now seek a broader engagement.

 

On education, we will expand exchange programs, and increase scholarships, like the one that brought my father to America, while encouraging more Americans to study in Muslim communities. And we will match promising Muslim students with internships in America; invest in on-line learning for teachers and children around the world; and create a new online network, so a teenager in Kansas can communicate instantly with a teenager in Cairo.

 

On economic development, we will create a new corps of business volunteers to partner with counterparts in Muslim-majority countries. And I will host a Summit on Entrepreneurship this year to identify how we can deepen ties between business leaders, foundations and social entrepreneurs in the United States and Muslim communities around the world.

 

On science and technology, we will launch a new fund to support technological development in Muslim-majority countries, and to help transfer ideas to the marketplace so they can create jobs. We will open centers of scientific excellence in Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia, and appoint new Science Envoys to collaborate on programs that develop new sources of energy, create green jobs, digitize records, clean water, and grow new crops. And today I am announcing a new global effort with the Organization of the Islamic Conference to eradicate polio. And we will also expand partnerships with Muslim communities to promote child and maternal health.

 

All these things must be done in partnership. Americans are ready to join with citizens and governments; community organizations, religious leaders, and businesses in Muslim communities around the world to help our people pursue a better life.

 

The issues that I have described will not be easy to address. But we have a responsibility to join together on behalf of the world we seek - a world where extremists no longer threaten our people, and American troops have come home; a world where Israelis and Palestinians are each secure in a state of their own, and nuclear energy is used for peaceful purposes; a world where governments serve their citizens, and the rights of all God's children are respected. Those are mutual interests. That is the world we seek. But we can only achieve it together.

 

I know there are many - Muslim and non-Muslim - who question whether we can forge this new beginning. Some are eager to stoke the flames of division, and to stand in the way of progress. Some suggest that it isn't worth the effort - that we are fated to disagree, and civilizations are doomed to clash. Many more are simply skeptical that real change can occur. There is so much fear, so much mistrust. But if we choose to be bound by the past, we will never move forward. And I want to particularly say this to young people of every faith, in every country - you, more than anyone, have the ability to remake this world.

 

All of us share this world for but a brief moment in time. The question is whether we spend that time focused on what pushes us apart, or whether we commit ourselves to an effort - a sustained effort - to find common ground, to focus on the future we seek for our children, and to respect the dignity of all human beings.

 

It is easier to start wars than to end them. It is easier to blame others than to look inward; to see what is different about someone than to find the things we share. But we should choose the right path, not just the easy path. There is also one rule that lies at the heart of every religion - that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. This truth transcends nations and peoples - a belief that isn't new; that isn't black or white or brown; that isn't Christian, or Muslim or Jew. It's a belief that pulsed in the cradle of civilization, and that still beats in the heart of billions. It's a faith in other people, and it's what brought me here today.

 

We have the power to make the world we seek, but only if we have the courage to make a new beginning, keeping in mind what has been written.

 

The Holy Koran tells us, "O mankind! We have created you male and a female; and we have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another."

 

The Talmud tells us: "The whole of the Torah is for the purpose of promoting peace."

 

The Holy Bible tells us, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God."

 

The people of the world can live together in peace. We know that is God's vision. Now, that must be our work here on Earth. Thank you. And may God's peace be upon you.   

 ###

Jun 4 2009, 6:17AM

Quick-Read Highlights Of The Speech

1. Separated into seven parts; sprinkles Muslim phrases ("assalaamu alaykum") throughout speech; quotes "Holy Koran" three times; defends Israel, condemns anti-Semitism; condemns settlements; devotes section to women's rights;

2. First addresses "violent extremism" in Muslim world; says America will defend itself "sovereignty of nations and the rule of law." Says that Palestinians must abandon violence. "Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed."

3. Says "No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons." Says Iran should have access to civilian nuclear technology.

4. Says that America shouldn't impose its version of democracy on the world but that

do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn't steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. Those are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere.


5. Talks about Muslims in America; freedom of worship and mosques;  says "we cannot disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretense of liberalism."

6. Says, of women's rights:

Our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons, and our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity - men and women - to reach their full potential. I do not believe that women must make the same choices as men in order to be equal, and I respect those women who choose to live their lives in traditional roles. But it should be their choice. That is why the United States will partner with any Muslim-majority country to support expanded literacy for girls, and to help young women pursue employment through micro-financing that helps people live their dreams.


Jun 3 2009, 8:14PM

LiveBlogging Obama's Speech To The Muslim World

In this space, at 6:10 am ET Thursday.

Jun 3 2009, 7:45PM

2010: Dems Eye Georgia

Democrats got a reason to be optimistic about their chances in Georgia in 2010 today, as former Gov. Roy Barnes (D) entered the race for the governorship, which is currently held by two-term Republican Sonny Perdue. Barnes had been a favorite for the Democratic nomination even before he announced.

Jun 3 2009, 7:30PM

The Day In Politics, 6/3

Today, we learned that Newt Gingrich has explain-ogized his comments about Sonia Sotomayor; President Obama supports Medicare cost-cutting with more teeth; Nancy Pelosi asked the GAO to investigate the GPO; you can follow Obama's trip on Twitter; and a rumor floated in Cairo that Obama had caused a mosque to close.

More

Jun 3 2009, 6:50PM

The Invisible Primary, 6/3

Tracking the GOP race to 2012

Today, Chris Cillizza asks if Sarah Palin should run for reelection; The Times-Picayune notes that Bobby Jindal was not on the radar for 2012 potentials in yesterday's CNN poll; The Buzz gave a similar review of Jeb Bush's performance; Tim Pawlenty appeared on MSNBC today, repeating that he doesn't know what his future will hold: "I'm not ruling anything in or out," he said.

Jun 3 2009, 4:29PM

How To Talk To Israel: A Sticking Point

NOTE: Post updated 6/4/09 with material from President Obama's speech in Cairo.

In the last month, the debate over Israel policy has been a tale of two letters.

AIPAC and J Street--the two major rivals in the Israel lobbying scene--each circulated a letter in Congress in May, both addressed to President Obama, both urging support for Israel and a two-state peace solution with Palestinians. One garnered 328 signatures in the House; the other, 87.

While their differences on broad guidelines may not be great, they offered two different visions of how the U.S. should engage--and gave windows into the battle lines being drawn in Congress and what's at issue for both sides.

One big sticking point--only mentioned in one of the letters--was whether the U.S. and Israel should keep their disagreements private.

And speaking in Cairo Thursday morning, President Obama made it clear where he stands: that America should say publicly what it says to Israel in private, and that no special privacy arrangement should be extended to the U.S. ally.

More

Jun 3 2009, 3:56PM

The Humiliation Doctrine v. The Humility Doctrine

A common metaphor runs through the words that most conservative commentators use to describe Barack Obama's foreign policy, and, in particular, his speech early tomorrow morning to the Muslim world, which the White House has entitled "a New Beginning."

It is that Obama does nothing but concede American weakness -- and, in particular, by apologizing or somehow walking away from harder rhetorical constructions, he humiliates our national character. Weakness, apologies, humiliation. American meekness -- as opposed to the projection of American strength -- troubles the conservative mind.  

Here's the dean of conservative foreign policy talkers, Charles Krauthammer, on Obama's outreach to Russian president DmitryMedvedev: 

"'Smart diplomacy' is a meaningless idea, but if it has any meaning at all, it is not ever doing something as humiliating, amateurish, and stupid as this." 

Here's Mitt Romney from two days ago, urging Obama to stop his "tour of apology": 

"I draw the line by saying in reaching out to other nations we certainly should not stand up and apologize for America."   

The idea is that America has scarified too much for these countries to be apologizing for anything.

Last week, Dick Morris cataloged Obama's foreign policy as "Anti-American" because it was premised on apologies. 

When Obama recorded a YouTube meant for the people of Iran to see, Bill Kristol called it "a weak and embarrassing statement by the President of the United States" because it did not refer to core American values like liberty and freedom. 

Newt Gingrich worried in April: 

"I think there is something fundamentally wrong with weakness in America, and then playing to placate dictators."  

Prominent Military affairs writer Ralph Peters fretted upon Obama's election that America's "international strategy" might not survive, along with some of our allies, because Obama seemed so willing to undermine American narratives at any opportunity.  

Indeed, for these conservatives, it seems as if the goal of foreign policy in the post-Bush era is to avoid appearing weak -- humiliation avoidance. And lo' and behold, Obama seems to believe that self-humiliation is a central tenet of his efforts to make America right with the world and the world right with America. (Sean Hannity: "It might do him good to remember that apologizing didn't get the allied forces anywhere in World War II.")  

Obama derives his world view from a different metaphor -- one of "dignity promotion." (See this explanation from Spencer Ackerman.) There is little room in this construct for a strictly Manichean division between Good and Evil.

The influences of Christian thinkers like Reinhold Niebuhr are obvious, as Obama has admitted. ("Democracies are indeed slow to make war, but once embarked upon a martial venture are equally slow to make peace and reluctant to make a tolerable, rather than a vindictive, peace," Neibuhr once said.)

True strength, Obama believes, is achieved when a country exposes some of the subcutaneous, vulnerable tissue under its tough exterior when doing so serves our national interests. Let me unpack that a bit. 

In Obama's mind, these apologies, concessions, or what-not may, on their surface, seem to many Americans to be the proffering of a weak hand. But if it is in America's interests for -- to put it plainly -- the Muslim world to trust us more (to help combat Islamism, a nuclear Iran, terrorism) -- then it is not out of line to project a less bullying, less patronizing image of America. There is some realism in this.

Obama understands that many Americans believe that the country, as an entity, should not apologize for anything; that, as much as we might make mistakes, we're a force for good in the world, our extracurricular endeavors are aimed at liberating the world from tyranny, and that our interests suffer if other countries perceive our self-reproach. 

For conservatives, America is like a person negotiating a deal; showing weakness, even if calculated, never gets you what you need. But we're not a person; we're a collection of interests with a long but disputed history; and the truth of the matter is that many Americans -- a majority of Americans, if you want to look at election results -- found themselves quite humbled by what the Bush administration did. And facts matter, too. History, at this point, does not support the claim that we invaded Iraq to liberate the Iraqis. Our democracy-promoting efforts in Palestinian territories probably prolonged the conflict there. 

The Obama White House doesn't like to use the word "apology." They speak instead of dignity promotion, or acknowledgment of "mutual interests' or of "soft power." And despite its Christian influences, it is a profoundly secular worldview, one that does not justify its action by some reference to an idealized "America" or the sanction of God. At the same time, it manages to be universalizing. 

This fairly profound departure from the way the Bush Administration thought about itself is quite unsettling to Obama's critics. And it is also not the way that Americans are used to thinking about themselves. (We live in an exceptional country, a nimble, responsive democracy that constantly strives to do good, even when we do bad -- our military is extremely inefficient because we so carefully try to avoid civilian casualties -- and so on.) 

Which approach is better suited to the world today? Obama's post-election gestures seem to have reduced the level of anti-Americanism and taken that complaint off the table in some instances, but much of that anti-American sentiment was contrived, and it is easy to make gestures when the American people have faith in your leadership skills. If Obama loses that trust, if he capitulates too much, if he cuts past the adipose layer and into the muscles, then the criticism will have more resonance.

Jun 3 2009, 3:53PM

A Good Muslim-World News Cycle For Obama

In coverage leading up to President Obama's speech in Cairo tomorrow, Middle East newspapers and TV stations--some of them government run, some of them censored--are posing the speech as an opportunity to improve relations, separating Obama from his predecessor, and touting Obama's perceived toughness on Israel. In short, the coverage was good from Obama's standpoint.

As Arab, Persian, and Pakistani media analyze Obama's trip, it's accepted almost universally that the Israeli/Palestinian peace process will be key to his success in the region--a point many news outlets made today.

More

Jun 3 2009, 3:10PM

Obama Embraces Health Care Cost-Cutting Commission (With Teeth)

Finally, some specifics. President Obama wants health care form to be revenue neutral and today endorsed a Congressional proposal to strengthen an independent government-cost cutting commission. In a letter to the two senators who are crafting health care reform bills, Obama said was "open" to giving the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission the power to recommend cost reductions unless Congress overrides the particular rulings. 2009healthcare ltr rel (2).pdf

In the letter, Obama acknowledged  that the costs of health care reform would need to be offset by up to $300 billion more than has already been budgeted, and he said he would consider "appropriate proposals to generate additional revenues."  That's code for, among other things, a tax on health care benefits for individuals making more than $250,000 a year, an idea Obama opposed in the primary when Sen. John McCain made it a centerpiece of the Republican health care platform.   

More

Jun 3 2009, 2:15PM

Rumor: Mosque Closed For Obama Speech

From Dubai-based Al Arabiya, a rumor floated in Cairo that a mosque had been cordoned off and closed for worship in preparation for President Obama's speech there earlier tomorrow morning. Members of the Muslim Brotherhood criticized Egypt's security service, though the head of the mosque maintained it was simply closed for renovation. (As Marc noted earlier, the White House invited 10 members of the conservative Brotherhood--an opposition party that has carried out violent campaigns--to the speech.)

Jun 3 2009, 1:50PM

Follow Obama's Trip On Twitter

I'm not overseas, but Ed Henry of CNN (@edhenrycnn), Christina Bellantoni of the Washington Times (@cbellantoni) the lovely Michael Scherer of Time  (@michaelscherer) my buddy Jake Tapper of ABC ( @jaketapper ) and the peripatetic Mike Allen ( @mikeallen )  are all tweeting 24/7.  Follow them as a group on #preztrip. 

And remember: I'm @marcambinder. Less buttoned up, more casual... and always on the news (not on my breakfast.) 

In other SMS news: the U.S. government has set up an SMS delivery system to permit folks around the world to respond to Obama's message tomorrow. U.S. citizens, apparently, can't access the system. (Btw: won't the National Security Agency be monitoring the incoming texts to see if anyone stupid enough to threaten America leaves tracks?) 

Jun 3 2009, 12:56PM

GAO To Investigate Nuclear Info Slip

Following the accidental publication of details on U.S. nuclear sites--including where enriched uranium is stored--on the Government Printing Office's (GPO) website, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has asked the Government Accountability Office to investigate: "The disclosure of information related to nuclear facilities suggests that the current system does not provide adequate review and safeguards. Accordingly, I have asked the Government Accountability Office to investigate immediately what led to the disclosure of this information and to make recommendations to prevent a similar disclosure in the future," Pelosi said. It sounds like a straightforward mistake--someone thought they were supposed to publish something, as it is the GPO's job to do, when they weren't actually supposed to--and it's been deemed more embarrassing than dangerous, as noted in the Post article, but the GAO will provide a thorough vetting of what took place and some recommendations on how it can be avoided.

Jun 3 2009, 12:28PM

Muslims Of The World, Lend Him Your Ears

For the past several months, American diplomats have been working with their partners in the Arab world on a top-secret project: when Barack Obama delivers his address to the world's Muslims later this week, the White House wants to ensure that it is seen or heard by hundreds of millions of the faithful across the Middle East, Africa and Asia. 

More

Jun 3 2009, 11:29AM

Mitt Romney Won't Run GM

Atlantic editor James Bennet wrote a really smart and provocative piece about why President Obama should tap Mitt Romney to run General Motors. His reasons are all good, chief among them: 1) GM needs a leader that wasn't present at the uncreation, 2) Romney needs a way to distinguish himself from Republican rivals, and 3) Obama needs some political cover to properly shrink the company, and seems to love coopting enemies.

I'm not going to disagree with my editor, because 60 percent of me thinks he's right, and the rest of me really likes my job. Instead I'll name the reasons why Mitt Romney will never run General Motors.

More

Jun 3 2009, 10:58AM

High And Low: Supreme Court Vs. Eviction Court

Sonia Sotomayor's rise from public housing and life story as a Latina from the Bronx are seen by many as excellent reasons to put her on the court--facets of her life that have led her to pragmatic fair-mindedness as a jurist. They're seen by others as flimsy reasons to nominate anyone.

But James Warren, at his Atlantic Correspondents blog, sees some disconnect between the debate over Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the highest court and what's going on in one of the lowest ones--Chicago's eviction court, where the everyday struggles of trying to keep a roof over one's head, paying a mortgage despite delinquent residents, property scams and system-gaining tenants are laid bare:

More

Jun 3 2009, 9:30AM

"Brotherhood" Invited To Obama Speech By U.S.

A sign that the Obama administration is willing to publicly challenge Egypt's commitment to parliamentary democracy: various Middle Eastern news sources report that the administration insisted that at least 10 members of the Muslim Brotherhood, the country's chief opposition party, be allowed to attend his speech in Cairo on Thursday. The brotherhood is a Salafist/ Islamist party with branches in many countries, and it does not have a reputation for liberalism and has supported violent campaigns against Israel (and Egypt's own government). It has deep roots in the region and traces its intellectual lineage to Sayyid Qutb, a top American-educated Islamic intellectual who was executed -- or martyred -- by the Egyptian government in 1966. The Brotherhood has direct links with Sunni groups like Hamas in the Palestinian territories. Its standing in Egypt has suffered as of late because of a crackdown by the Egyptian government and a growing frustration that it is too conservative (anti-women's rights, the whole gamut) for a modern Middle East. Still, it's the largest Sunni opposition party in the world, and it's clear that the Obama administration wants to engage the Sunnis -- even the less moderate Sunnis -- in his "Mutual Respect" tour. Hoping to tamp down criticism that by speaking in Egypt, Obama is giving legitimacy to Hosni Mubarak's quasi-dictatorship, the administration also invited leading human rights activists to the speech.

Jun 3 2009, 8:53AM

Obama Pushes Privately On MedPac

Be sure to read this update from Jonathan Cohn at TNR. He explains how the White House has thrown down a fairly concrete marker on cost-cutting by privately supporting a proposal by Sen. Jay Rockefeller to put more teeth into the government's Medicare cost containment mechanism.  As Cohn notes, hospitals and doctors and care providers are going to fight this provision tooth and emanel. 

Jun 3 2009, 8:47AM

Gingrich Explain-ogizes For "Racist" Comment

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich concedes that his tweet calling Judge Sonia Sotomayor a "racist" was "perhaps too strong."  In an e-mail to supporters, Gingrich writes that "The word "racist" should not have been applied to Judge Sotomayor as a person, even if her words themselves are unacceptable (a fact which both President Obama and his Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs, have since admitted)."  He then devotes more than a thousand words to an an essay about how Sotomayor's remark about wise Latinas "reveal[s] a betrayal of a fundamental principle." Still, Gingrich admits that "[]n fairness to the judge, many of her rulings as a court of appeals judge do not match the radicalism of her speeches and statements. She has shown more caution and moderation in her rulings than in her words."  

Jun 3 2009, 6:00AM

The Foreign Policy Test

President Obama came into office promising a new paradigm of foreign policy. As he travels to Saudi Arabia, we ask: will Middle East leaders be receptive--and where will it get him the first time around?

Jun 2 2009, 7:00PM

The Day In Politics, 6/2

Today, we learned that an Army recruiter was shot and killed in Little Rock; President Obama nominated Republican Rep. John McHugh as secretary of the Army; the Saudi ambassador says reporters should cover whatever they want; a former colleague penned an op-ed backing Sonia Sotomayor; Americans are skeptical of the Muslim world; Tim Pawlenty is not running for reelection, and he says he doesn't know what the future will hold; the CIA paid tribute to an officer killed in the line of duty; and John McCain won the battle over Marine One.

More

Jun 2 2009, 5:27PM

The Invisible Primary, 6/2

Tracking the GOP race to 2012

Tim Pawlenty announced he will not run for reelection in 2010 and said he does not know what his future will hold; a CNN poll suggested there's no clear frontrunner in the GOP 2012 field; Democrats accused Charlie Crist of being absent from work; Sarah Palin drew a parallel between the killings of Dr. George Tiller and Army recruiter William Long; Mike Huckabee and Haley Barbour will travel to Iowa this month; and George Allen emerged to criticize cap-and-trade.

Jun 2 2009, 5:00PM

McCain Wins: New Marine One Demo Copter Officially Killed

Via the Navy, word that the contract for the next generation of Marine O... hey, a white top just flew by my window in the Watergate.... just this now, as I was writing about them. Seriously. Weird. Ok.  Where was I?  Ah yes. The contract for the VH-71 copter to be built by Lockheed Martin has been terminated. For now, President Obama will have to rely on his older fleet of Sikorsky VH-3D and VH-60Ns. The Pentagon had cut funding for the replacement fleet, but until now, funding continued for the prototype.  The trusty 20-year-old Nighthawks will just have to do...  Sen. John McCain has been the leading Congressional voice against the program, which was more than 50% overbudget. 

Jun 2 2009, 4:33PM

A CIA Case Officer, Killed In The Line Of Duty

The Central Intelligence Agency paid tribute yesterday to a case officer who was killed in the line of duty in 2003. The agency formally acknowledged the death of Gregg Wenzel, who was on assignment in Ethiopia when he was hit by a drunk driver. Wenzel, a lawyer from Sarasota Florida, was posing as a foreign service officer. He was a member of the first case officer training class to graduate after September 11. Also: the CIA disclosed that another member of the National Clandestine Service was killed in 2008, though the agency would not provide details.

Jun 2 2009, 4:30PM

Romney And General Motors: Why Not?

The boss, JB, has made a serious substantive case as to why Mitt Romney ought to be given the chance to turn around General Motors. Why would Romney want to take on such an assignment?

Maybe because the chance to renew an American icon, preserve America's manufacturing capacity, and save tens of thousands of jobs would mean something to him. Maybe because it would give him a platform to demonstrate what an effective leader he can be. Maybe because, along the way, it would allow him to save the Republican Party by proving that it stands for something besides...whatever it is that it stands for right now

Some folks in the White House like to joke about the "2017 Romney inauguration" when they think about precedents. It is, to be sure, a little bit cute, but it's also an homage to Romney's status in the GOP. 

More

Jun 2 2009, 4:22PM

Quote Of The Day: Cheney On Waterboarding

I'm a strong believer in [waterboarding]

Jun 2 2009, 3:57PM

Obama's Coalition

At his Atlantic Correspondents blog, Richard Florida notes that President Obama enjoys wide support across class demographics and projects that Obama may be developing a broad, cross-class coalition of support.

Jun 2 2009, 3:26PM

Pawlenty: No Plans Post-2010

Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty explained his decision not to run for reelection in 2010--which has been taken as a sign that he's interested in the presidency--today at a press conference with reporters in Minnesota and national media attending via conference call.

"When it comes to how long someone should stay in an elected position, a little less is better than too much," Pawlenty said, adding that the governorship should not be a permanent position.

"I want to give the folks who are running ample time to plan," Pawlenty said.

More

Jun 2 2009, 1:51PM

Mitt Romney Should Run GM

Of President Obama's stated goals for the taxpayers' investment in General Motors--"To get G.M. back on its feet, take a hands-off approach and get out quickly"--the middle one is likely to work against those at either end. The government can't hope to fix G.M. and sell it off without getting under the hood. Over decades now of restructuring plans at the company, two things have demonstrably not helped get much done: Money and time. The government can't simply give more of each to the automaker. What's needed is forceful, even ruthless, leadership to insist on the changes that everyone--the managers, the union leadership, the dealers, everyone--has known were necessary for about 20 years now.

More

Jun 2 2009, 1:24PM

Why Not Indonesia For Obama's Speech?

American and Muslim scholars wonder why President Obama didn't choose to speak to the world's Muslims from the world's most populous Muslim country -- Indonesia -- which happens to be more democratic than Egypt, where Obama touches down on Thursday.  The answer is two-fold: Egypt is a critical American ally, and not just because it took some terrorists off of our hands and tortured them. When it comes to dealing with Iran, Egyptian public opinion constrains the ability of Hosni Mubarak's government, which disparately wants to keep "the Persians" from going nuclear. As it stands, Mubarak has to cast the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as more troublesome than Iran, even though he probably believes the opposite. When it comes to vital American interests, a more pro-American Egyptian populace will give Mubarak leverage. A harsher American line against Israeli settlements and Obama's vocal endorsement of a two-state solution have also helped.  (I'm not saying that Egypt doesn't believe that an agreement between the PA and Israel isn't a necessary first step, just that, so far as threats to the Arab and Muslim worlds go, Tehran outranks Israel. An unstable Gaza and West Bank are just as dangerous in the near-term.) 

Jun 2 2009, 1:16PM

Has Dick Cheney Won The Argument Over Guantanamo?

A Gallup/USA Today poll finds that a 54 percent majority of Americans oppose closing the military prison at Guantanamo Bay--which leads us to the question: has Dick Cheney won?

Cheney has undertaken a public campaign against President Obama's national security policies, most notably closing Guantanamo and the end of "enhanced interrogation techniques," since Obama issued those orders two days after taking office. Cheney reiterated his opinions today at the National Press Club.

Since January, Obama's plan to close Guantanamo has suffered a few setbacks. Senate Democrats turned against it amid fears about transferring detainees to U.S. prisons, siding with Republicans in a 90-6 vote against funding the closure; the next day, Obama rolled out his national security policy in a speech at the National Archives, and, instead of backing his plan to close the prison, civil liberties and human rights groups blasted Obama for setting a precedent of "preventive detentions"--continuing a steady wave of criticism they have aimed at Obama this year.

It appeared the GOP's opposition campaign--based on claims that Guantanamo makes us safer, and transferring detainees to U.S. soil is dangerous--had worked.

Polling on Guantanamo has always reflected wavering opinions among the U.S. public. Though Obama ran on a platform of closing the prison, and won the 2008 election handily, there has not been consistent, widespread consensus on the matter. Over time, polls have gone back and forth.

More

Jun 2 2009, 11:43AM

2012: Pawlenty's Not Running For Re-Election

Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R-MN) won't run for re-election in 2010, a signal that the Republican governor, who has acquired a national profile in recent years, is thinking about a 2012 presidential bid.  Pawlenty will make the announcement today in a news conference scheduled for 3:00 pm ET.  A source in Washington who spoke with Pawlenty said that the governor had "made up his mind a while back."  Pawlenty's 2012 path mirrors the model that then-Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney took in 2006, when he decided that he'd rather go up -- to the presidency -- or out -- meaning that he would retire from political life rather than run for re-election. MORE....

Pawlenty has remained a relatively popular chief executive of a state that is trending blue. But his "my-way-or-the-highway" stance on tax hikes may diminish his standing by the end of his term.   His unflinching opposition has earned him plaudits from conservatives, but it has frustrated his Democratic state legislature. Pawlenty's name is now attached to $3 billion in budget cuts, resulting in praise from the Wall Street Journal and Americans for Tax Reform. Without re-election pressure, he's free to experiment even more.

57% of Minnesotans say they'd be open to someone else as governor, a sign that Pawlenty, although still personally liked by the voters, has worn out his welcome. Fairly conservative on most issues, Pawlenty has taken centrist stands on environmental legislation and health care; he is very frustrated with the tone his party has adopted; if, at some point before 2012, he decides to retire from politics altogether, I wouldn't be surprised.

He has played more than a bit role in the Coleman-Franken spat by refusing to seat Al Franken until Norm Coleman has exercised all of his legal options.  The effect this has had on voters is unclear.

Though Pawlenty won't embrace the "moderate" label, if he enters the 2012 field, he'd be well-positioned to earn himself a good look from Republican primary voters who are dissatisfied with the direction of the party. The governor prefers the term "modern" conservative. He supports government intervention to reduce global warming and wants his party to focus on the material needs of middle class voters. He's pro-life and opposes gay rights, but he recently signed a bill that gives unmarried couples property rights. He opposes federal or state funding for embryonic stem cell research. He is an evangelical protestant. 

Pawlenty's biggest asset is his personal charm; he's a nice guy, a good schmoozer with reporters (still a vital part of the pre-primary process). He's a little goofy, too, having only recently ditched his famous mullet haircut for a more conservative do. 

Jun 2 2009, 11:15AM

Americans Skeptical Of Muslim World

Many campaign supporters of Barack Obama hoped that, as president, he could bridge the gap between Americans and the Muslim world, which many see as distrustful of America; as he travels to the Middle East later today, some are speculating about his ability to do so. A CNN poll today, meanwhile, finds that 46 percent of Americans hold an unfavorable view of the Muslim world, while three in ten are neutral and one in five see the Muslim world favorable. Interestingly enough, unfavorable opinions have increased since 2002.

Jun 2 2009, 10:45AM

More Support For Sotomayor

As Judge Sonia Sotomayor begins informal meetings with senators today on Capitol Hill, another of her former colleagues has stepped forward to publicly advocate for her confirmation: Hugh H. Mo, Sotomayor's co-prosecutor in her first murder case, penned an op-ed in Politico today on how real-world experience has prepared her for the Supreme Court. Yesterday, 45 of Sotomayor's former clerks sent a letter to senators supporting her nomination.

Jun 2 2009, 10:20AM

Saudi Ambassador: Cover Whatever You Want

Members of the White House press corps were e-mailed this message yesterday from the Saudi Ambassador to the United States, Adel Al-Jubeir:

Amb Al-Jubeir, Saudi Ambassador to the U.S., wanted us to bring the following information to your attention.  Please note the email below.  We don't know where the guidance to journalists came from but it is not at all accurate.  Journalists coming to Saudi are encouraged to go wherever and cover whatever they wish. 

Jun 2 2009, 10:13AM

Twofer: A Third GOPer, And An Open Seat

In asking Rep. John McHugh (R-NY) to serve as his Secretary of the Army, President Obama has accomplished two things at once: he adds a third Republican to his administration, and, as Chris Cillizza points out, he opens up what will undoubtedly be a very competitive seat.  McHugh is popular in his district, but Obama managed to win in it by five percentage points. 

Jun 2 2009, 9:58AM

Another Political Murder: Two Army Recruiters Shot

In the nation's second political killing in two days, an Arkansas man upset with the U.S. military shot and killed an army recruiter, and wounded another, in Little Rock yesterday. In a recent report, the Council on Foreign Relations cautioned that homegrown radicalism is particularly difficult for law enforcement officials because it's hard to anticipate the motives and actions of a homegrown terrorist; authorities are still investigating this suspect's motives, but they are thought to be "political and religious," according to CNN.

Jun 2 2009, 7:00AM

The Abortion Debate After Tiller

The assassination of Dr. George Tiller has renewed a decades-old debate between pro-choice and pro-life activists about the fundamental nature of speech and protest, about slippery slopes and sacrosanct principles -- and about life and death.  Will Tiller's death influence the American abortion debate?

Jun 2 2009, 6:00AM

White House: Health Reform Will Lower Costs

This is a political argument masquarading as an economic argument.  The White House is prepared to say today that reducing health care costs by 1.5% a year will increase gross domestic product by 8% over what it would otherwise be in 2030 and that providing insurance to those who don't have it amount to a net "welfare" effect of more than $100 billion. CEA Health Care Report Embargoed.pdf

A new report, previewed for reporters by Council of Economic Adviser chair Christina Romer, makes the case that doing health care reform properly is incredibly important for the economy. Makes a broadening of the White House argument, which has focused largely on access, to the economic benefits of reducing long-term costs.

The report documents the amount of inefficiences in the system and suggests some ways to reduce costs. The suggestions aren't specific because the White House "doesn't want to get ahead of the legislative process," Romer said. "The slowing of costs is certainly going to be challenging," she said.

Promoting the creation of small businesses might reduce insurance premiums over the long-term, especially if these businesses are given the ability to pool their employees and bargain with insurance companies.

The support suggests that reversing "job lock" -- where people with insurance don't leave bad jobs for better ones because they're worried about insurance -- will provide tangible economic benefits. (No discussion here of portability.)

Responding to an argument that subsidizing health care premiums results in an aggregate job supply decline, the report contends that such effects are likely to be "modest."

Expanding coverage to everyone could save as much as $65 billion a year in reduced mortality.

The report is vague about cost-cutting measures. In a moment of candor, Romer -- who, come to think of it, is usually fairly candid, admitted that "[c]hanging the incentives for providers depends much less on getting everyone covered" -- that is, health reform that focuses on access, which is what Congress and the White House are working on, won't do much of anything to contain costs. Romer said her report intended to look "beyond that" short term period.

Jun 1 2009, 7:00PM

The Day In Politics, 6/1

Today, we learned that Sonia Sotomayor's former clerks are recommending her for SCOTUS confirmation; Democrats are hitting six Republicans for opposing the stimulus; the White House issued strict guidelines to reporters traveling to Riyadh; the GOP is whiter, demographically, than the Democratic Party; Nancy Reagan said President Obama could have scored points by inviting her to his stem cell announcement; Michael Moore said goodbye to GM; Obama recognized gay pride month; and Sarah Palin worries about the pro-life movement after the assassination of Dr. George Tiller.

More

Jun 1 2009, 5:45PM

The Invisible Primary, 6/1

Tracking the GOP race to 2012

Mitt Romney blasted Obama's "tour of apology" in a defense policy speech in Washington, DC; John Ensign traveled to Iowa and said he's "not running for president...what I'm doing is raising my profile. I believe we need new voices...in the Republican party..."; Sarah Palin will travel to New York next weekend; she also drew some attention with her statement on the shooting of Dr. George Tiller; and Mike Huckabee will speak at a GOP fundraiser in North Carolina Thursday.

Jun 1 2009, 5:18PM

Palin Worries 'Bout The Pro-Life Movement After Tiller

Her political action committee issued a statement on her behalf:
"I feel sorrow for the Tiller family. I respect the sanctity of life and the tragedy that took place today in Kansas clearly violates respect for life. This murder also damages the positive message of life, for the unborn, and for those living.  Ask yourself, 'What will those who have not yet decided personally where they stand on this issue take away from today's event in Kansas?' 

Regardless of my strong objection to Dr. Tiller's abortion practices, violence is never an answer in advancing the pro-life message."

Jun 1 2009, 4:49PM

Obama's Proclamation: Some Gruel For The Gays?

President Obama, in a statement recognizing June as gay pride month, says he continues to support a repeal of the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy banning gays "in a way that strengthens our Armed Forces and our national security."  Obama also reiterates his support for "supporting civil unions and Federal rights for LGBT couples" and "ensuring adoption rights."  The proclamation finds a way to brag about Obama's accomplishments so far. I doubt the gay rights groups will do more than roll their eyes, but here goes:

I am proud to be the first President to appoint openly LGBT candidates to Senate-confirmed positions in the first 100 days of an Administration. These individuals embody the best qualities we seek in public servants, and across my Administration -- in both the White House and the Federal agencies -- openly LGBT employees are doing their jobs with distinction and professionalism.

See the full statement here:  2009LGBT prc rel (2).pdf

Jun 1 2009, 4:25PM

Michael Moore Says Goodbye To GM

Michael Moore, who first chronicled the problems of GM in the 1989 documentary Roger & Me, and who has criticized GM since the government began bailing it out in 2008, said goodbye to the company in a post on his website today. Moore's suggestion for GM's restructuring is to convert its factories to produce light rail, energy efficient buses, and alternative energy devices like solar panels, and for President Obama to declare an industrial/environmental effort akin to the manufacturing conversion to weapons production during World War II. He writes:
100 years ago this year, the founders of General Motors convinced the world to give up their horses and saddles and buggy whips to try a new form of transportation. Now it is time for us to say goodbye to the internal combustion engine. It seemed to serve us well for so long. We enjoyed the car hops at the A&W. We made out in the front -- and the back -- seat. We watched movies on large outdoor screens, went to the races at NASCAR tracks across the country, and saw the Pacific Ocean for the first time through the window down Hwy. 1. And now it's over. It's a new day and a new century. The President -- and the UAW -- must seize this moment and create a big batch of lemonade from this very sour and sad lemon.

Jun 1 2009, 3:52PM

Will Stimulus Spending In SC End Up At SCOTUS?

Gov. Mark Sanford had hoped that by making his case to a federal judge, he'd find a more sympathetic ear. Today, a federal judge said that such disputes more properly reside in the jurisidiction of the state supreme court. Trouble was, that court had already rejected a hearing because the budget in question had not passed the state legislature. Well, now it has -- and the state supreme court will take up the case soon. The state faces a July 1 deadline to apply for the stimulus money. Sanford, you'll recall, doesn't want to accept $700 million in stimulus money because he fears an unfunded mandate and a power grab by the feds; the state legislature wants the money; two students filed suit to force Sanford to ask for all the money at once; Sanford contends that his executive authority, and not the legislature, should determine whether to accept money that the federal government offers. The federal government has a different interpretation but so far has not had the chance to argue against Sanford in court. Assuming that the state supreme court forces Sanford to accept the money -- a good guess -- the governor might try his hand at a Supreme Court cert petition, although he said late today that he would accept whatever the state court decides to do.

Jun 1 2009, 3:44PM

Nancy Reagan: Obama Missed An Opportunity

In an interview with vanity Fair's Bob Colacello, Nancy Reagan talks about life after her husband, the Obamas and the Bushes. One snippet of analysis she gives about President Obama: he could have won political points by inviting her to attend his announcement of the executive order that ended the federal stem cell funding ban in March:
"I would have gone, and you know I don't like to travel," she tells Colacello. "Politically it would have been a good thing for him to do. Oh, well, nobody's perfect. He called and thanked me for working on it. But he could have gotten more mileage out of it."
Mrs. Reagan has long held that stem cell research has the capacity to deliver new cures, and she has publicly advocated on the issue.

Jun 1 2009, 3:23PM

Dems, Republicans, Independents By Race

Gallup has a report out today identifying the GOP as predominantly white, conservative, and religious. What's more notable than the "conservative" finding, however, is that 89 percent of Republicans in the survey were white--23 percent higher than the 65.6 percent* of the nation's total population that is white.

More

Jun 1 2009, 2:03PM

Tiller's Death: A Debate About Speech

The assassination of Dr. George Tiller, an undeniably political act, has been roundly condemned by the mainstream groups associated with the abortion debate, and within the mainstream of abortion lobbying/activism, the political significance of Tiller's death has not yet become manifest. With Randall Terry as a notable exception, the major pro-life and pro-choice figures have issued statements almost entirely devoid of politics. Pro-lifers, especially, have said their movement is about the sanctity of life, and thus cannot support an act of murder.

More

Jun 1 2009, 12:35PM

White House Press Corps Warned: In Riyadh, Don't Leave Your Hotel Or Photograph Women

Via several e-mail chains comes today this authentic and plaintive e-mail from the United States Embassy in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Because the White House added the Saudi stop to the President's oversees trip so close to the date of departure, the Saudi government is allowing U.S. journalists to enter the country without a visa. That's nice of them. Through the U.S. embassy, though, the Saudi government insists that the White House press corps stay in the confines of their hotel (the Marriott in Riyadh) except for official events on penalty of "arrest and detention."

The embassy also passes along these tips and pointers about Saudi "law and custom."

·       Do not photograph women, mosques, government buildings, airports, military facilities, souqs, old buildings, homes or Saudi nationals.  Photographs should not be taken outside of official venues and events without consulting with White House press staff and US Embassy press staff on-site.

·       The wearing of attire considered appropriate by local standards is strongly advised.  

·       Do not import or display any drugs, alcoholic beverages, pork products, any form of pornography, or any non-Islamic religious material.  

·       The Marriott Hotel has an ATM in the lobby, thus no currency exchange will be available. 

Thank you for your cooperation.

US Embassy

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 

Jun 1 2009, 12:16PM

Answering Your Questions: CIA Chips And Woodward's Secrets

Reader A:

Interesting story you linked to about the chips. Do you think this is the secret weapon Woodward has refused to describe?

Me:  It think one of them. 

For background, in one of his books, Bob Woodward referred to a secret and "lethal" special forces program to kill Iraqi militants, implying that the program, details about which he said he had been asked not to provide, was responsible for a significant chunk of the post-Surge reduction in violence.

More

Jun 1 2009, 11:35AM

Stimulus Politics: Dems Hit Six GOPers, Touting Jobs, Tax Cuts

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has launched efforts against six House Republicans, hitting them for voting against the stimulus (as did all House Republicans, except for two who didn't vote)--including radio ads, robocalls, and emails to residents of their districts. The six Republicans are: Brian Bilbray (CA), Charlie Dent (PA), Peter King (NY), Thaddeus McCotter (MI), Tom Rooney (FL), and Don Young (AK).

More

Jun 1 2009, 11:29AM

Now That The Government Owns General Motors...

As you've probably heard by now, Obama is sending General Motors to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. And, as you've also probably heard, the United States will become the majority shareholder of the restructured company, with 60% of the stock. Nationalizing a large car manufacturer is interesting and controversial for all kinds of reasons (is Ford, the "last American car company," now competing with America?), and I think Jon Cohn is making some good points here. But this, from Politico, is kind of odd:

Even as it gets set to announce the bankruptcy of General Motors Monday, the Obama administration is struggling to set parameters on how it will act after taking a 60 percent stake in the new company that emerges -- and now that it has become the owner of a significant swath of Corporate America.

The United States "has become the owner of a significant swath of Corporate America"? Really? That has about as much perspective as, um, line drawings before Brunelleschi (or something). So I thought it would be fun to come up with a graphical representation of what the "significant swath" looks like:

percentage of american companies owned by the united states.png
The section of the chart that appears in bright, bumblebee yellow is the percentage of publicly traded American companies owned by the United States.* I don't see much bumblebee yellow. What I do see is that Microsoft Excel feels the need to portray the percentage of American companies owned by the government as an irrational exponential number. That's 5.07e^-02, or %0.0507 of American companies that are owned by the United States. (When I ask Excel to display this breakdown in real numbers without the exponential it just becomes "100%" and "0%.")

In the coming week there will be much debate over what it means for the United States to be the majority shareholder of a major car company. Much of that debate will be serious and interesting. There will also be a lot of talk about how the United States is a socialist country in which the government has nationalized half of what was formerly known as private industry. That debate will be a lot less interesting.

----

(*I should have a little note on methodology here: I took the value of all publicly traded companies in the United States, which is available in the CIA factbook. The last data available is from December 31 2007, so I adjusted that value based on the percentage declines of a few major stock indices. I took that value -- about $12.5 trillion -- and subtracted the publicly traded values of the companies the United States owns. I used AIG, General Motors, Fannie and Freddie. I estimated values for a couple of other companies -- Amtrak, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the TVA, etc -- and threw them into the mix, too. A little algebra and presto, we have the chart.

If you wanted to be very generous you could use figures other than the publicly traded values for GM and AIG -- the Obama administration certainly thinks GM is worth more than what it's trading for. If you wanted to be even more generous you could add a couple of the big banks that the government is implicitly guaranteeing. I don't think that will substantially change the picture above, but email me or post a comment with any methodological suggestions.)



Jun 1 2009, 10:40AM

Clerks Recommend Sotomayor

45 of Sonia Sotomayor's former clerks have signed onto a letter of recommendation for their former boss, sending it to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, Ranking Member Jeff Sessions, and other members of the committee.

In it, they refute some criticisms of Sotomayor that anonymous clerks (most of whom worked for other judges on the Second Circuit) leveled in Jeffrey Rosen's widely read New Republic piece on her--e.g. that she isn't intellectually qualified for the job, and that she's a bully: "As former law clerks to Judge Sotomayor, each of us can attest to her intellectual prowess.."; "She is a judge who is tough and fair, yet highly respectful of her colleagues in the judiciary (including those with whom she sometimes disagrees) and the litigants appearing before her." See the full letter, released today by the White House, below:

More

Jun 1 2009, 10:20AM

Marc's Three More Clicks: Franken V. Coleman, CIA Tech, Etc.

Sometimes, six clicks aren't enough. Be sure to check out:

Rick Hasen liveblogging the Minnesota Supreme Court for oral arguments in Franken V. Coleman.

Robert J. Samuelson's argument on The Obama Infatuation. In essense: the country is too preoccupied with Obama's historicity and personal charm to apply the level of skepticism that is necessary for a functioning democracy. His culprit: the media.

A Guardian story about the CIA using electronic targeting chips to attack Al Q and Taliban forces in Pakistan. They're giving the chips to friendly tribesman and asking them to  plant them near Al Qaeda safehouses. Problem: sometimes, the tribesman are planting them at the homes of enemy tribesmen.  Folks there fear that the "parthai" are invitations for CIA drones....



Jun 1 2009, 7:39AM

The New GM: Five Political Challenges

The economists and business writers will evaluate the GM restructuring with authority. From our vantage point, here are five political questions that the administration will no doubt be challenged by over the next few months.

1. Convincing the country that this restructuring -- and they'll call it a "restructuring" -- is an inevitable consequence of a process that began during the Bush administration. So far, the public seems to believe this, but the longer the government fiddles with the industry, the more Obama will be seen as the fiddler.

2. There is "an inevitable tension" between taxpayer protection and the length of the government's ownership, an administration official told reporters last night. Put plainly: the longer the government owns GM, the better the chance that taxpayers will see the money put in GM recouped. (BTW: Bankruptcy is scheduled for "60 to 90 days." It will most certainly take longer, perhaps even into 2010.)

3. In big companies with unions, it's not possible, really, to go through an orderly bankruptcy without involving the unions. The challenge for the administration: explain to Americans why the unions deserve the concessions they're getting and sell the concept that UAW has already given up a lot. So far, the public, in an anti-corporate mood, is OK, but I suspect that since this issue still hasn't forced itself to the forefront of the public attention span, the public hasn't been given the chance to evaluate the deal on fairness terms. 

4. How hands-on will the government be? In theory, it'll leave all but the corporate governance decisions up to GM -- the nameplates to end, the dealerships to close, the shops to keep open etc -- but in practice, the government will have veto power, and will have the ability to help appoint a corporate board that reflects Obama's view of the economy.

5. What's happening to my warranty? No doubt that GM car owners will want to know the answer. The media will help by giving the government's answer: nothing. It's still valid. But there are lots of other consumer questions, like -- when GM closes dealerships and service centers and when associated manufacturers shut down, will it take longer -- and cost more -- to fix my car? The answer is: yes. (Here's a great Q and A on this subject.)