Latest Mosheh Oinounou News | Fox News

Senators Call for End to Cuba Travel Restrictions

Tue, 31 Mar 2009 15:38:54 -0400

American citizens will soon be able to hop on a direct flight to Havana if Congress passes a bill proposed Tuesday.

Through the measure, a bipartisan group of 20 senators is calling for an end to the 47-year-old ban on travel to Cuba.

"This is a failed policy that has failed for 50 years and it long past the time to change the policy," said Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D. "Punishing the American people in our effort to somehow deal a blow to the Castro government has not made any sense at all."

Advocates of the proposal cast it as an attempt to weaken the Cuban regime that will "make a difference for democracy."

"The best antidote to totalitarianism is the American citizen traveling, the ability to actually communicate with other people," said Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., who joined Dorgan and Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., at a press conference Tuesday announcing the proposal. "The one thing that totalitarianism can't stand is light, is communication, is information."

"It undermines the communist regime to have other voices joining the Cuban people," Dorgan noted.

The U.S. established the travel ban along with a number of other restrictions, including a trade embargo, in 1962 soon after Fidel Castro's takeover of Cuba. His brother Raul now rules the island nation, located 90 miles from the Florida coastline.

But critics of the proposal, including Cuban-born Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., assert that any U.S. tourism dollars will only go to bolster the Castro regime.

"This is the time to support pro-democracy activists in Cuba, not provide the Castro regime with a resource windfall. Changing travel restrictions for U.S. citizens will simply allow Americans to contribute to the resources available to the Castro regime to perpetuate its repression," Martinez said in a statement. "My fellow senators should be standing in solidarity and showing support for the 11 million Cubans who are suffering under the Cuban regime, instead of making it easier for Americans to vacation in Cuba."

Sen Bob Menendez, D-N.J., one of the most anti-Castro voices in Congress, successfully led a coalition opposing a similar amendment to the 2009 omnibus spending bill last month. He called the lifting of the travel ban "deeply offensive" and threatened to vote against the entire spending bill, which funded the government through October.

And while bill sponsors maintained Tuesday that they are not seeking any changes to trade policy, Martinez and other critics fear that loosening trade restrictions will be the next logical step as a number of interest groups are looking to open up the Cuban market to U.S. goods.

However, outside groups like U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Human Rights Watch, which joined bill proponents at Tuesday's press conference, argue that the half-century old policies have made life more difficult for the Cuban people without any measurable benefits.

"The U.S. policy toward Cuba has neither weakened the Cuban government nor improved the situation of human rights in the country. On the contrary, it has helped consolidate the Castro regime's hold on power by providing the government an excuse for its problem and justification for its abuses," said Jose Miguel Vivanco, Americas director for Human Rights Watch.

Bill proponents have not set a date for the Senate to take up the legislation but were confident that they have the necessary votes to move forward with the bill.

"I think that we have finally reached a new watermark here on this issue. I think there is sufficient votes," Dorgan said, noting that while the White House has yet to endorse the measure, President Obama sent signals during last year's campaign that he was open to loosening restrictions on Cuba.

House Republican Moves to 'Terminate the TARP'

Mon, 08 Jun 2009 17:15:07 -0400

A key House Republican introduced a bill Monday that will set a Dec. 31 deadline for the Treasury Department to lend money to troubled financial institutions.

The government launched the $700 billion TARP -- or the Troubled Asset Relief Program -- last fall to bail out banks and other financial institutions whose collapse posed a systemic risk to the US economy. Treasury has since allocated more than $600 billion to dozens of banks, the American Insurance Group (AIG), and failed automakers GM and Chrysler, among other companies.

"It's time to terminate the TARP program," Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, told reporters on Monday. "TARP is increasingly not being a vehicle for economic stability and taxpayer protection but is evolving into 700 billion dollar revolving slush fund that the administration can use to advance economic, social and political agenda items far and apart from what Tarp was ever designed to do."

Hensarling, who is the only sitting member of congress on the Congressional Oversight Panel -- the five-member board tasked with overseeing the allocation of TARP funds, said his legislation calls for reducing the amount of the TARP program by recalling all currently unspent funds and sets a Dec. 31, 2009 deadline for the allocation of TARP funds.

The bill would also kill a provision in last year's Emergency Economic Stabilization Act that would enable Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner to renew the TARP program for two more years.

"The economy is in serious condition but we have gone past the emergency point. I fear that TARP is no longer what Congress thought it was when it passed it and I certainly do not believe it's what the American taxpayer thought it was," said Hensarling, who sits on the House Financial Services committee.

It also requires the Treasury to accept TARP repayments from "safe and sound" institutions without additional mandates and adjusts treatment of warrant preferred shares to entice TARP repayment.

The Texas Republican is especially concerned that the White House is making it unreasonably difficult for financial institutions to repay TARP funds by "changing the rules."

"Treasury has put hurdles that should not be there," Hensarling said, noting Geithner's recent comments that even if institutions are considered "safe and sound" by regulators, they may still face additional requirements before they are allowed to pay back the government.

"You can argue that the administration or Congress has changed the deal," he said, noting his bill will smooth the path for TARP recipients to return the money to Uncle Sam.

Hensarling is seeking allies from both sides of the aisle including California Democrat, Rep. Brad Sherman, an outspoken critic of the TARP program.

Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., is also set to introduce similar legislation on the Senate side but details are not yet available.

Ad Calls on Obama, Businesses to Increase Pressure on Iran

Mon, 08 Jun 2009 11:10:35 -0400

A non-partisan interest group is calling on President Obama and American businesses to increase pressure on the Iranian regime to end its suspected pursuit of nuclear weapons.

United Against Nuclear Iran is launching a 30-second TV ad, called "Unclenched Fist," Tuesday on cable news networks.

The spot, which will run for two weeks, cites Obama's call in his inaugural address to Iran's rulers to "unclench your fist" but warns that country continues to be led by "radical rulers seeking nuclear weapons, threatening the world."

"Americans can do something about it. We can put economic pressure on the Iranian regime -- pressure to keep them from building a nuclear arsenal and ensure security for all of us," a narrator says.

The group, launched in September by Amb. Richard Holbrooke, State Department envoy Dennis Ross and former CIA Director James Woolsey, among others, is seeking to pull all the key levers of power to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons. Holbrooke and Ross are no longer affiliated with the group since taking on roles in the administration.

A spokesman for United Against Nuclear Iran says the ad is part of an "ongoing conversation" and is not meant as an attack on the White House but rather a call for the U.S. government and the American people to closely monitor the Iranian response to Obama's overtures -- including his YouTube address to Iranians, his speech in Cairo last week and plans to invite Iranian diplomats to July 4 celebrations.

"President Obama is doing exactly as he promised and taking these small steps," said Joe Kildea, a group spokesman. "We now have to watch how Iran responds and keep the pressure up ... to ensure they stop the pursuit of nuclear weapons."

House Passes $106 Billion War Spending Bill

Tue, 16 Jun 2009 18:33:22 -0400

The House narrowly passed the $106 billion emergency war spending bill Tuesday afternoon.

The package provides funds to wind down the war in Iraq, build up operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan as the U.S. doubles it's troop numbers this summer and allocates billions towards controlling and preventing the outbreak of H1N1 flu.

The bill passed 226-202.

A handful of Republicans voted with Democrats including Army Secretary nominee Rep. John McHugh, R-N.Y.

At issue for Republicans Tuesday was a $5 billion allocation to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) added by the Senate that the GOP said did not belong in a war spending bill. Republicans also cited the removal of a provision banning the release of photos of detainees being abused.

The photo measure was popular on both sides of the aisle but was removed last week as the Senate and House hammered out a compromise after a group of Democrats raised concerns about its' legal ramifications, making final passage difficult.

In order to assuage concerns, President Obama vowed privately that he would use all of his powers to ensure the photos never see the light of day but many Republicans remained unconvinced.

More than 30 mostly anti-war Democrats, including Reps. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, Lynn Woolsey and Barbara Lee of California also voted against the bill since it funds the continuation of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"I see it as a disservice to the taxpayers of this country and a disservice to the brave men and women who defend us every day," said Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana, House Republican Conference chairman.

"A global bailout on the backs of our soldiers is just not right....stand with our troops, stand with the American taxpayer, stand against one more bailout," he said.

House Majority Leader, Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., accused Republicans of trying to bring down the bill as an attempt to "embarrass Democrats."

"Do not use this addition by the United States Senate as a reason to say 'I can't vote,' for what 80 percent of this bill does (is) support those young men and women -- deployed abroad in the defense of freedom and the furtherance of our security," Hoyer said.

The final bill now goes to the Senate for a final vote before hitting the president's desk.

In Alternate Energy Plan, GOP Calls for 100 New Nuclear Plants in 20 years

Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:59:44 -0400

Just weeks before the House is set to vote on the Democratic cap-and-trade energy bill, Republicans introduced an alternative plan Wednesday that calls for the nation to embrace nuclear power.

The GOP proposal, dubbed the American Energy Act, sets a goal of nearly doubling the nation's nuclear power infrastructure by building 100 new plants in the next 20 years -- calling for streamlined construction regulations, additional tax incentives and lower trade barriers for utility companies.

The bill also focuses on more off-shore domestic exploration of oil, lifts barriers to government purchase of alternatives like oil shale and tar sands, and establishes a trust fund to encourage the development of other new energy sources.

"It is part of an all-of-the-above strategy that offers energy independence, more jobs and a cleaner environment without imposing national energy tax," said Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., chairman of the House Republican conference.

The plan resembles the proposal Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., pitched during the 2008 presidential campaign, but the GOP nominee set a more conservative of goal of building 45 plants over two decades.

Republicans contrasted their bill with the Democratic energy proposal, the American Clean Energy and Security (ACES) act, which is centered around the creation of a system that would establish a federal cap on carbon emissions and create a market to allow utilities to trade pollution credits.

"The Democrats' national energy tax wages economic war on Americas families, business and family farms and it must be opposed," Pence said, arguing that utilities will be forced to raise prices to cope with the new limits and the proposal will further hurt the economy during a recession.

Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, was a little more blunt.

"They like to call it ACES but I call it C.R.A.P. -- continue ruining America's prosperity," he said.
Unlike the Democratic bill which sets a goal of cutting carbon emissions by 83 percent by 2050, House Republicans argue that a targeted CO2 cut is unnecessary, unrealistic and too costly, and that the constraints on manufacturers will drive them overseas where they face limited pollution constraints.

House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, ridiculed the Democratic proposal as "lunacy."

"They have the idea that they and that the government can control how much carbon dioxide goes into the atmosphere," he said. "At the end of the day we are going to do more for the environment with this all-of-the-above approach than they are with their cap and trade."

Barton added the impact of the Democratic proposal will be catastrophic for industry but negligible on the environment.

"Is it worth it to you to have the trillions and trillions of dollars and millions of jobs lost so that at best, 40 years from the average world temperature, whatever that number means, is two degrees Celsius less than it would be otherwise?," he asked, citing an EPA analysis of the Democratic bill. "I think the answer to that question is no."

Democratic Rep. Hastings Proposes Creating Gitmo 2.0

Thu, 21 May 2009 17:44:21 -0400

A Guantanamo Bay Version 2.0 may be in the works.

A Democratic representative is developing a unique proposal that attempts to strike a middle path in the debate as to whether the U.S. should permanently close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay next year or keep it open indefinitely.

Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-Fla.) said Thursday that he is open to keeping a more transparent Guantanamo facility, complete with more aggressive third party monitors, open beyond the White House January 2010 closure deadline to hold the most dangerous inmates.

"If we have transparency and accountability, than you can leave Gitmo just like it is," he said. "The physical plant of Guantanamo is built to hold people. And therefore I argue and will pursue the administration to give a look at legislation that I am developing that will give transparency and accountability and may satisfy our allies as well," Hastings said, noting that he would enable groups like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the Red Cross to have better access to monitor the facility.

Hastings has yet to seriously discuss the proposal with the White House but asserts that it could be a viable solution given that the new Gitmo comes with a guarantee of no torture.

Hastings, a former U.S. District Court judge, cited a problematic prison he once ordered closed, renovated and eventually reopened.

"I went in-same facility-we just changed what was going on inside and therefore the perception changed," he said, when asked about President Obama's assertion Guantanamo poses a international perception problem for the nation.

Given that Obama has vowed that no torture will take place at the facility, Hastings said Obama will be able to declare that "the new Guantanamo is open."

He said that his plan could proceed once the administration's review of the 241 detainees concludes and the president determines which suspects to put on trial, deport or move to prisons in the U.S. Hastings estimates the new Guantanamo will have to accommodate about 30 of the ultra-dangerous detainees.

"So you try the ones you can and the ones that ultimately cannot be handled at all-where are you gonna put them?" Hastings asked.

He said that he doesn't see another short-term solution to the "political brouhaha, not in my backyard" problem the White House faces on Capitol Hill where numerous Democrats have joined with Republicans to say no to housing Gitmo detainees in their states and districts.

Congressional Budgeters Predict 10.5 Percent Unemployment Rate Next Year

Thu, 21 May 2009 12:08:27 -0400

While the economy will begin growing again by the end of 2009, the unemployment rate will continue to expand into next year, the Congressional Budget Office reported Thursday.

The CBO projects Americans will continues to lose jobs through mid-2010, with the umemployment rate peaking at 10.5 percent next year, CBO Director Doug Elmendorf said in testimony before the House Budget Committee.

The CBO's March assessment initially predicted unemployment would peak at 9.5 percent.

"We think it will be a slow, a painfully slow recovery," Elmendorf told the committee, citing the ongoing crises in the housing and credit markets.

He added that the financial system is still in a "weakened state" even though it "has crawled back from the edge of the abyss."

"All of those factors will lead to a tepid recovery, somewhat more tepid than we thought and assessed the conditions a few months ago," Elmendorf noted.

He said employment numbers are often a lagging indicator of economic recovery, noting a number of positive trends including stabilizing manufacturing output, signs of life when it comes to consumer spending and confidence and that the decline in housing construction may be close to bottoming out.

The current unemployment rate is 8.9 percent. The Labor Department on Thursday reported 631,000 new jobless claims last week.

The Federal Reserve said Wednesday that the unemployment rate could rise to 9.6 percent this year and remain elevated until 2011. Some private economists told The Associated Press they expect the rate to reach 10 percent by the end of this year.

Judge Upholds Mandatory DNA Testing for Felony Suspects

Thu, 28 May 2009 16:07:22 -0400

A California federal judge ruled Thursday that mandatory DNA collection for all individuals facing federal felony charges is constitutional, dealing a setback to civil liberties advocates.

U.S. District Court Judge Gregory G. Hollows upheld the DNA Fingerprint Act, a 2006 law which allows federal law enforcement officials to collect DNA from individuals "arrested, facing charges, or convicted" of federal offenses.

Previously, states throughout the country had a variety of different laws on the books regarding DNA collection---with most mandating testing only after a suspect had been convicted of a crime.

"The court holds that after a judicial or grand jury determination of probable cause has been made for felony criminal charges against a defendant, no Fourth Amendment or other Constitutional violation is caused by a universal requirement that a charged defendant in a felony case undergo a 'swab test,' or a blood test when necessary, for the purposes of DNA analysis to be used solely for criminal law enforcement, identification purposes," Judge Hollows wrote in his ruling.

Federal officials hailed the decision as a victory for law enforcement.

"We are very gratified with the ruling. DNA evidence has proved invaluable in both solving crimes and exonerating the innocent," said Acting United States Attorney Lawrence G. Brown.

At issue was the case of Jerry Albert Pool, a California man arrested in January for possession of child pornography. After his arrest, he refused to submit to a DNA test on the grounds that it violated his fourth amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure.

Hollows wrote that any individuals arrested upon probable cause has a "diminished expectation of privacy in his own identity." He added that DNA fingerprinting is a natural "technological progression" from the use of fingerprinting and photographs currently apart of the routine booking process.

But American Civil Liberties Union officials called Thursday's ruling "an incredible threat to civil liberties."

"We think this ruling is incorrect. It ignores the presumption of innocence and it does not pay enough attention to the protections of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution," said Michael Risher, staff attorney with the ACLU of Northern California.

While the ACLU is not a party to the ongoing litigation, Risher says the organization is very concerned about the government creating a giant DNA database and using this law to falsely arrest individuals solely to obtain their DNA.

"This gives the police an enormous incentive if they are interested in somebody to simply arrest that person on pre-textual charges in order to get a DNA sample from them," he said.

"There is simply an enormous amount of information stored in our DNA," he added. "We don't know what the limits of that information are. What we do know is that technology is advancing and claims at least are being made that researchers can mine our DNA for an enormous amount of personal information about us."

In the ruling, however, Hollows said that increased DNA collection will actually "help to exculpate" individuals who were wrongfully convicted and said the 2006 law has adequate built-in protections to ensure that the DNA samples will not be improperly used.

FOX News' Mike Majchrowitz contributed to this report

Justice Souter Describes Judges' Impact on History as 'Slight'

Tue, 05 May 2009 17:04:59 -0400

PHILADELPHIA -- In his first public speech since announcing his retirement from the Supreme Court, Justice David Souter argued Tuesday that while most justices and cases are quickly forgotten, they play an “imperative” role in maintaining a safe, stable democracy.

“For most of us, the very best work that we do sinks into the stream pretty quickly," Souter told more than 300 judges at the annual Third Circuit Judicial Conference in Philadelphia.

"And if we have got to look for a satisfaction that is more than momentary, God knows if we are gonna look for one that endures for a career or a lifetime, we have got to find that satisfaction not in the great moments but in being part of the great stream,” he said.

Souter, who spoke for only about 14 minutes, was uncharacteristically melancholy and emotional in his remarks to a group he has addressed annually since taking his seat on the nation’s highest court in 1990.

Souter, 69, oversees the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, which includes Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware.

Quoting a legal scholar who once questioned his place in history, Souter’s answer was that judges must look at the big picture when considering their impact.

“Our value does not come from the moment we all aspire to have---the moment of the error-free trial, of the perfect decision and opinion…(we) thought should get into the case books by next year,” Souter said, noting that there are only a handful of famous decisions remembered beyond 20 years like Marbury v. Madison (1803).

“If we are a lucky we all have a few of those (decisions) in our careers. But if we are honest we have to realize our significance, even if we are lucky, is very slight,” he said.

Souter, who has previously described returning to the court every year as an “annual intellectual lobotomy,” also recalled a recent visit to Westminster Abbey, the burial site for former British leaders where the royal court met for centuries.

“I think I saw the individuals whose faces were obscure and names were unknown and I think realized that I was part of that company,” he added.

More important Souter said is for judges to think of themselves as part of a “great guild" whose members are mostly “forgotten” but still fought to keep their values alive.

“The law has replenished its people as it has replenished its cases,” he said. “There has to be a safe place and we are it.”

Waxman Confident 'Cap and Trade' Will Pass Energy Committee by Memorial Day

Tue, 12 May 2009 14:05:32 -0400

The top House Democrat charged with navigating controversial "cap and trade" energy legislation through Congress announced Tuesday that the bill will pass the House Energy and Commerce Committee before Memorial Day.

While the panel repeatedly has had to postpone taking up the energy bill because of concerns from a significant number of moderate Democrats, Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., said Tuesday that he is still on pace to meet his extremely ambitious schedule.

"By the end of next week, we will consider and pass the energy legislation," he said in remarks to the National Community Pharmacists Association annual conference.

In a briefing Tuesday, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer also was adamant that the bill would go through the final committee stage next week and then be tackled on the floor sometime over the summer.

Hoyer said he was "hopeful we'll move those out of committee before the Memorial Day break" which starts at the end of the next week.

Waxman said the quick passage of the energy legislation, which features a plan to cap carbon emissions and allow power companies to buy and sell credits to emit extra carbon dioxide, is vital in order for the committee to then take up health care reform legislation this summer.

"President Obama wants to get things done. He has pledged to take on big issues," Waxman said. "So as chairman of the committee, I want to be his partner. And our committee has two of the three of his legislative legacies ... health care and energy."

Waxman also predicted that the House will take up and pass health care reform by July 31.

The energy bill lays out an ambitious timetable calling for domestic carbon emissions to be reduced by 20 percent by 2020, 42 percent by 2030 and 83 percent by 2050. It also requires that 25 percent of U.S. power will be produced by renewable energy sources by 2025.

But Republicans and a number of moderate Democrats, many from the Rust Belt, have raised concerns about the timetables and argue that as proposed, the cap and trade legislation will raise costs for consumers and hurt business during a recession. The opposition from the moderate Democrat wing has stymied Waxman's ability to move the bill to the floor in recent weeks.

Rep. GK Butterfield, D-N.C., called the 2025 goal "impossible" during a committee hearing in April, adding, "I am particularly concerned that the economic impact will be particularly devastating on low income families in America. Low income families simply cannot absorb the increase in consumer prices that are sure to come."

But Waxman was optimistic Tuesday that Democrats have reached a middle ground on a number of sticking points including how to distribute the pollution credits, though he would not discuss the details of the compromise.

"What we have been doing is trying to reach out to all the different industry groups and the environmental groups and try to develop a consensus for legislation," Waxman told FOX News after his remarks.

Waxman added that he will be meeting privately with members of the Energy and Commerce Committee Tuesday afternoon to discuss the next steps forward in order to take up the bill.

"This bill is a very high priority for our committee," he said.

Cuban Activists Decry Black Lawmakers' Meeting With Castro

Wed, 06 May 2009 15:42:53 -0400

Cuban democracy advocates went to Capitol Hill on Wednesday to call on three members of the Congressional Black Caucus who recently met with Fidel and Raul Castro to also address human rights concerns on the island.

Berta Antunez delivered a letter from her longtime civil rights activist brother accusing Reps. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., Bobby Rush D-Ill., and Laura Richardson, D-Calif., of being "insensitive" to their cause during a trip to Cuba last month because they didn't meet with any dissidents.

"It is ironic that individuals such as yourselves, who have been elected to your positions through a democratic system, and who enjoy all human rights, do not wish the same for the Cuban people," the letter read.

"It is undignified to use prerogatives that for us are inaccessible, such as to traveling to and from one's homeland, having an opinion without fear of persecution, or associating with others who share similar interests, and then to ignore the victims of oppression in Cuba," the letter added.

Antunez, who was joined by fellow activist Anolan Ponce on Wednesday, is the sister of famed Cuba civil rights advocate Jorge Luis Garcia Perez Antunez, who served 18 years in prison for protesting the regime.

Lee, Richardson, and Rush were part of a six-member delegation that traveled to Cuba in April and called for improved U.S.-Cuban ties and met with the Castro brothers.

Upon arrival at Lee's office, Berta Antunez and Ponce met with a legislative aide for the California lawmaker.

"I came to deliver a letter to the congresswoman from my brother which expresses the insult of the pro-democracy movement on the island that just kilometers away from where they were meeting with Fidel and Raul Castro that my brother and other pro-democracy activists in Cuba were being assaulted with tear gas and were being subjected to the most repressive activity," Berta Antunez said through a translator following the meeting.

"It was almost a slap in the face to the pro-democracy and human rights movement on the island," she added.

A spokesman for the CBC did not respond to a request for an interview.

The letter questioned whether the black lawmakers had abandoned their commitment to social justice.

"When we recall the fight and integrity of Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks, without whom you would still be giving up your seat on the bus and would not have the right to vote, we ask ourselves if the legacy of those who conquered the space of opportunity that you enjoy today, has been reserved only for political speeches and has ceased to be a commitment of your generation to justice and truth," the letter continued.

Lawmakers Bet on Internet Gambling Legislation

Wed, 06 May 2009 11:39:39 -0400

If running major financial institutions and the auto industry isn't enough for the Obama administration, a new House bill would put the Treasury Department in charge of Internet gambling.

Reps. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, and Peter King, R-N.Y., unveiled legislation Wednesday that would enable Americans to legally gamble online.

"The government should not interfere with people's liberty unless there is a good reason," Frank said. "This is, I believe, the single biggest example of an intrusion into the principle that people should be free to do things on the Internet. It's clearly the case that gambling is an activity that can be done offline but not online."

But the legislation grants the Treasury Department far-reaching power over online gambling.

The bill would allow the Treasury secretary to license and revoke licenses of Internet gambling Web sites under the guise of protection Americans' personal freedoms to gamble and consumer protection concerns.

The bill would also allow the Treasury secretary to "assess" license holders for the costs of background checks and investigations of Web sites applying for the license.

And the bill provides for mechanisms for state and local taxes to be collected and re-distributed.

The law currently prohibits credit card companies and banks from processing bets placed on online gambling Web sites.

The legislation will repeal language passed in 2006 and signed into law by President Bush that made it illegal for banks and credit card companies to process bets made on the Internet.

Opponents argue that this will serve as a "clear danger to our youth" and encourage gambling addiction at a young age.

"If you put a computer in a teenager's bedroom, or in a student's dorm room at college, it's a temptation that many fall prey to," Rep. Spencer Bachus, R-Ala., said in a statement. "In fact, studies have shown that the earlier one begins gambling, the more likely it is he or she will become a compulsive problem gambler."

But Frank said his bill will include safeguards to prevent underage or compulsive gambling and other illegal activity.

"The notion that a society should prohibit something entirely because of the possibility that children will abuse it is a terrible blow to liberty," Frank said.

Among the safeguards in the bill is that any Internet gambling operator would be required to: ensure an individual placing a bet is of legal age (as defined by the law in the state or tribal area) and physically located in that jurisdiction, combats compulsive Internet gambling and money laundering, and protects privacy.

Frank added that he feels this will lift the burden off banks, which are compelled under the current legislation to regulate gambling activity.

The Poker Players Alliance, chaired by former New York Sen. Alfonse D'Amato, supports the bill. D'Amato said Wednesday in a press release that he is "grateful for Chairman Frank's leadership and will be activating our grassroots army made up of over one million members to help him drive legislation."

Michael Brodsky, head of Youbet.com, an online gambling Web site, praised Frank's bill.

"Banning Internet gambling has the same effect as the ban on alcohol had during Prohibition," Brodsky said. "It merely drives the activity underground, forgoes massive tax revenues and makes criminals out of otherwise law-abiding citizens.

"Chairman Frank's bill realities and would bring this underground activity into the light," he added.

Oink! Group Calls Out Top Congressional Porkers

Tue, 14 Apr 2009 13:08:21 -0400

Lawmakers asked for nearly $20 billion in earmarks or "pork-barrel projects" in their homes states in 2009, a nearly 15 percent increase in funding from last year, according to a prominent taxpayer interest group.

At a press conference Tuesday featuring both costumed and live mascots, including two Vietnamese pot-bellied pigs, Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) released their annual Pig Book, detailing the thousands of special projects lawmakers requested for 2009.

While the number of earmark projects requests decreased by 12 percent last year from 11,610 to 10,160, the amount of money going to the projects increased by more than $2 billion to 19.6 billion for FY 2009.

"Despite repeated claims by members of Congress that earmarks have been reduced, the Pig Book belies that claim," said CAGW President Tom Schatz, who noted that this year's spending bill also included 221 anonymous earmarks amounting to $7.8 billion of the spending that no lawmakers took credit for.

The book highlights a number of "egregious" projects, including $1.8 million for swine odor and manure management in Ames, Iowa, $3.8 million for the Old Tiger Stadium Conservancy in Detroit, $1.9 million for a water taxi service in Connecticut and $380,000 for a fairgrounds area in Kotzebue, Alaska.

Schatz said the group released the book one day ahead of April 15 IRS deadline to ensure Americans were cognizant of where their tax dollars are being spent.

While GOP leaders have hammered Democratic bills this year for allowing too much wasteful spending and earmarks, CAGW found that House and Senate Republicans account for about 40 percent of the earmark requests.

"Pork has been used by both parties as reelection currency. They use these projects to get reelected every two or every six years. There is no moral high ground here when it comes to pork barrel spending because most of Congress partakes in this process," said CAGW Vice President David Williams.

In the U.S. Senate, Mississippi Sens. Thad Cochran and Roger Wicker, both Republicans, finished first and third respectively in overall earmark requests and brought home more than $1 billion in government cash for their state.

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Dan Inouye of Hawaii finished second with $444.9 million in requests. Rounding out the top five were Sens. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., at $386 million and Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, with $382.7 million.

Over in the House of Representatives, Hawaii Democratic Reps. Neil Abercrombie and Mazie Hirono teamed up to bring nearly $500 million dollars to America's 50th state.

Abercrombie took home the most earmarked dollars -- $256.8 million, followed by South Dakota Rep. Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin with $230 million, Hirono with $202.6 million, Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va., with $183.5 million and Rep. Bill Young, R-Alaska, with $167.5 million.

CAGW representatives attacked Congress and President Obama for not doing more to reduce wasteful spending, noting that the president had a chance to draw a line when it came to earmarks when he received the $410 billion spending bill last month that included all the pork money.

"Vetoing the omnibus would have sent a very strong signal to congress, to the big spenders, to the appropriators, to everyone that change had truly come to Washington, D.C. Unfortunately we are seeing more of the same," Williams said, as a mascot in a pig costume shook its head.

For its part, the White House argued that the 2009 bill was the work of the Bush administration and "last year's business" even though passage finally took place in March and promised earmark reforms for the 2010 budget process.

Congress has approved multiple recent earmark reforms, which require, among other things, legislators to post all of their earmark project requests on their Web sites ahead of time. Additionally, lawmakers have cut the number of earmarks by nearly $10 billion from the 2006 high of $29 billion in requests.

Schatz praised the reforms so far as a positive step but said more needs to be done.

The event was also used to preview Wednesday's "tea parties," which organizers say will draw thousands of anti-tax and anti-spending protesters at rallies across the country.

"This Pig Book is more than just a list of projects. It shows why taxpayers are frustrated, why tomorrow when people have to send in their taxes, why there is this high level of frustration. It's no coincidence that there are going to be tea parties across the country," Williams said. "There is growing divide between members of Congress and the people that pay taxes and this divide is getting bigger and bigger."

Click here to read the Pig Book.

House Approves Democratic Budget Plan

Thu, 02 Apr 2009 19:13:07 -0400

The House today approved the $3.45 trillion budget outline that will serve as the blueprint for Congress to determine spending priorities for the coming year.

The bill passed mostly along party lines with a 233 to 196 vote. House Republicans voted unanimously against the plan but were joined by 20 moderate democrats.

The House proposal calls for about $100 billion less in spending than the initial White House proposal but includes all of President Obama's major budget initiatives on energy, education and healthcare.

"This is sort of an emancipation day, this is a special day for us. It is a day that we waited for, worked for, hope for and now we will be able to pass a budget that is truly a statement of national values," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

Republicans argued that the budget "spends too much, taxes too much and borrows too much," to pay for unecessary domestic programs and called for increased tax cuts to help Americans deal with the bad economy.

"The budget before the House makes the economy worse and will destroy more American jobs," said House Minority Leader Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio. "If you just look at the spending in this budget, it's staggering. American families are making sacrifices. They're tightening their belt. But Washington clearly is not."

House Republican Conference Chairman Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., called the bill "the most fiscally irresponsible budget in American history."

The budget resolution does not have the force of law and will not be signed by the President. But once the Senate and House reconcile their two proposals, which they are expected to do later this month, the plan will serve as an overall guideline as Congressional committees write appropriations bills for next year's spending priorities.

The House plan also contains "reconciliation" language which will enable Democrats to fast-track health care and education plans without one Republican vote.

Democrats argue that it will set the government on a path to more than halve the current projected $1.7 trillion deficit down to $586 billion by 2013.

"This is a responsible budget, not just for today but for the long-term," said House Majority Leader, Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., adding that the Bush administrations "fiscal irresponsibility" led to the need for major deficit spending.

Meanwhile, House Republicans offered an budget alternative that proposed spending $4.8 trillion less and borrowing $3.6 trillion less than the Democratic bill over the next 10 years.

The proposal, which would have also extended the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts and rescinded most of the stimulus bill, failed by a 293 to 137 margin. Thirty-eight Republicans, mostly from swing districts, voted against their own party's budget plan.

The Republican proposal is really a hollow shell of a budget, it gives increased tax cuts to the wealthy, makes an assault on social security benefits, Medicare and Medicaid and erases the recovery package which is a source of hope," Pelosi added.

"The American people want us to find our common ground where we can but they did not send us here to split the difference. They want real change and we have come here to make a difference."

GOP Split on Whether to Reach Out to Moderate Democrats in Budget Battle

Thu, 26 Mar 2009 08:06:51 -0400

House Republican leaders appear to be split on whether to reach out to their moderate colleagues on the other side of the aisle to fight the Democratic agenda.

While Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., held out an olive branch to moderate Democrats known as "Blue Dogs" Wednesday, calling on his "friends" to join the GOP in opposing the budget, House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, slammed the group as "lap dogs."

The split underscores the difficulty the Republican Party is having finding a way to fight President Obama's budget blueprint, endorsed Wednesday by the House Budget Committee.

Ryan made a blunt appeal for Democratic allies this week.

"I want to make a plea to a special select audience. I want to ask my friends, the Blue Dog Democrats, do you really want all this government? Do you want your fingerprints on this massive and unprecedented growth in our national debt? You hold the cards. You hold the votes that can make a difference in this," said Ryan, the senior Republican on the House Budget Committee, during a hearing on the 2010 budget Wednesday.

Ryan's office went so far as to post his remarks to YouTube. And the Wisconsin congressman promoted the comments on his Twitter page.

Meanwhile, Boehner, who has said multiple times at recent press conferences that he had no plans to reach out to moderate Democrats, has teased the coalition.

"We'd love to have conservative Democrats join us. But every time they get a chance to do that, they always end up voting with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and the left," he told FOX News Thursday, ahead of a planned unveiling of the GOP alternative budget plan.

He called the group "lap dogs" who refuse "to get off people's laps and actually do something," during a speech Wednesday, according to Politico.com.

"They're not the force they used to be in terms of moving the Democrats to do something," Boehner reportedly told the Yale Club and Federal Policy group.

The Blue Dogs, a coalition of 51 moderate House Democrats, include legislators from conservative districts who often cross the aisle to vote with Republicans on spending, gun control and social issues. A number of caucus members have been quoted in recent weeks expressing concerns about the size of Obama's budget.

The mixed GOP message comes weeks after House Republicans declared that they had found their "voice" as the 187 members voted unanimously to oppose Obama's stimulus plan.

However, the split message is the second example in a week of strife within the conference. Nearly half of House Republicans voted for a bill last week taxing the bonuses of AIG executives, with Ryan joining GOP Minority Whip Eric Cantor, R-Va., in supporting the legislation. Boehner and the rest of the Republicans voted no.

Ryan made his plea Wednesday directly to Blue Dogs Co-Chairman Rep. Charlie Melancon, D-La., during the budget markup hearing calling on the group of centrists to "join us to stop this fiscal train wreck."

"We're asking our friends on the other side of the aisle ... to help us defeat this unprecedented taxing, borrowing and spending spree, and let's get back together and fix these fiscal problems in this country, which this budget exacerbates and makes much, much worse," Ryan added.

GOP Conference Chairman Mike Pence, R-Ind., also told reporters recently that he was hearing some "very interesting rumblings" coming from Blue Dogs on spending and envisioned a coalition with like-minded Democrats.

For their part, Blue Dog leaders said Boehner should look in the mirror before accusing another caucus of being "lap dogs."

"These statements come from the same individuals who wrote the president a blank check for eight years, driving spending to the highest levels in our country's history," Melancon said.

"Rather than just saying 'no,' the Blue Dogs will continue working in a productive manner to moderate legislation and offer commonsense policy alternatives. We do not subscribe to the extreme philosophies of the far right or the far left, and we certainly do not take serious issues and use them for political gain," he added.

A Blue Dog aide said that members of the caucus are still willing to work with GOP legislators but that Republicans have so far failed to make any effort to reach out to the group.

Interest Group Targets Moderate Democrats in Ad Calling on Support for Obama Budget

Wed, 25 Mar 2009 11:58:52 -0400

The liberal interest group Americans United for Change is launching a TV ad blitz Wednesday in 12 states to push moderate Democrats and Republicans to support President Obama's $3.6 trillion budget proposal.

The new ad, entitled "Blueprint," doesn't name names of specific lawmakers but asks citizens in target markets to call Congress and "tell them you support President Obama's budget. Let's all get to work rebuilding America."

"For eight years, the Bush administration turned our economy into a house of cards," an announcer says. "Now President Obama has drawn up a budget blueprint that will rebuild our economy on a solid foundation. Jobs, health care, education, clean energy -- reform. On this foundation we can build real, long term economic prosperity for all Americans."

The specific ad markets include Maine, Bismarck and Fargo, N.D.; Omaha, Neb.; Richmond, Newport News and Roanoke, Va.; Indianapolis, Ft. Wayne, Terre Haute and South Bend, Ind.; Little Rock, Ark.; Baton Rouge, Shreveport and New Orleans, La.; Anchorage, Alaska; Scranton, Pa.; Ashville, N. C.; Tucson and Phoenix, Ariz.; Manchester, N.H.; and Wilmington, Del.

The ad buy will total more than $700,000, and is going up in the home states of a number of key moderate Democratic senators, including Evan Bayh, Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu, Mark Warner and Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, who has been somewhat critical of the budget recently. The spot will also air in Maine, home to moderate Republican Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins.

"The work that begins this week on President Obama's budget is by far the most significant in shaping the president's transformational commitments to health care reform, education and clean energy -- investments that will rebuild and renew America's economy and lay a solid foundation for long-term prosperity," said Tom McMahon, Acting Executive Director of Americans United for Change.

"This ad is designed to engage the American people in the process of bringing about the transformational change they voted for in November by contacting their elected representatives and asking for their help in putting our country on the road to prosperity. It is our hope that Congress gets the boost it needs to stand up to the special interests that will do anything to maintain the failed policies of the last eight years that were entirely stacked in their favor and that turned our economy into a house of cards."

The spot is the latest ad by AUC, which most recently launched spots arguing that Republicans in Congress were following the lead of talk show host Rush Limbaugh in saying "no" to every Democratic proposal.

House Passes Mortgage Bankruptcy Bill

Thu, 05 Mar 2009 18:25:40 -0500

The House passed a bill Thursday intended to ease the burden on homeowners struggling to pay their mortgages.

The so-called "cram down" bill passed by a 234-191 margin. The final tally was not entirely party-line as 24 Democrats voted against the bill and seven Republicans supported the measure.

The legislation, which now heads to the U.S. Senate for consideration, empowers federal judges to modify the mortgages for borrowers who file for bankruptcy, including lengthening loan terms, reducing interest rates and cutting principal payments.

The bill is officially dubbed the "Helping Families Save Their Home Act," but is known as the "cram down" bill because it enables judges to reduce or cram down the size of the mortgage.

The legislation ran into some trouble last week when a group of moderate Democrats raised concerns that the legislation would make bankruptcy too attractive to homeowners facing foreclosure. But after passing an amendment today supported by the group, the bill now requires that borrowers and lenders make a good faith effort to modify a mortgage before homeowners make the leap to bankruptcy court.

"This is something that will help all Americans by making sure that the bankruptcy process through Chapter 13 is available to those that need it, but at the same time it is the option of last resort," said Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Calif., who heads the New Democrat Coalition, the moderate group of Democrats that sought to alter the bill.

Republicans, who argue that the cram down bill rewards some irresponsible borrowers and lenders, failed in their last-ditch effort to kill the legislation this afternoon by a mainly party-line vote. Their "motion to recommit" failed by a 182 - 242 vote.

The GOP attempt to send the bill back to committee called for limiting the scope of the legislation to ensure "unscrupulous and irresponsible actors" would not receive government funds.

During final floor debate Thursday afternoon, Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., accused Republicans of following the lead of conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh and his call to ensure President Obama fails. Frank warned that Republicans would be "taking a lot of innocent people hostage" if they defeated the bill.

Meanwhile, Republicans argued that they are only trying to defend American taxpayers.

"When it comes to housing, today is just another example of why taxpayers are fed up with the way Washington works. The American people are sick and tired of Washington forcing taxpayers to pay for the actions of those who have been irresponsible," Minority Leader John Boehner said.

Key Democrat Prepares for Another Possible Stimulus Package

Wed, 11 Mar 2009 17:05:29 -0400

The ink from President Obama's signature is barely dry on his first economic stimulus package, yet a top Democrat already is getting ready for another one -- if it should become necessary.

Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., suggested Wednesday that although it is too early to be moving forward with a new stimulus package, he has directed House Appropriations Committee staff members to begin "preparing options" and ideas for the possibility of another bill to revive the ailing economy.

"It's premature to talk about a second stimulus package. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't be thinking and preparing options for the time when it may become necessary," said Obey, chairman of the committee.

If lawmakers were to passed a new stimulus package, it would mark the third time in a year and the second since Obama took the reins of power in January.

While senior Democratic aides were quick to talk down the prospect of a another stimulus Wednesday, given concerns that Americans may be experiencing "spending fatigue," the story has gotten a bit out of their hands in the last 24 hours.

First, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif, said at a news conference Tuesday that Democrats are patient for the current package to work but open to another spending plan if necessary.

"It will take a little time to get going, some of it's already in the works, but we must give it time to work," she said. "You have to keep the door open to see how this goes."

At the same event, two economists advising the Democratic caucus acknowledged that Obama's initial stimulus plan is likely to produce a "disappointing" number of jobs and that a second recovery plan may be necessary.

"I think another stimulus package is a reasonable probability given where things are going," said Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody's Economy.com.

Later on Tuesday, Obey told one reporter that he had instructed to committee aides to begin putting together an "outline" for another stimulus plan.

Democrats woke up to headlines in a number of news outlets stating that a second spending plan was all but assured.

Republicans pounced.

"It sounds eerily reminiscent of Japan in the '90s. As we all know, they passed numerous fiscal stimulus bills frequently throughout the decade of the '90s...but the Japanese economy looked very much like it did at the beginning of the decade," said Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. "My members are highly skeptical that we can spend our way out of this particular problem."

House Minority Leader Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, echoed his concerns, citing the $787 billion stimulus bill, the $410 billion spending measure, Obama's $3.6 trillion budget plan for next fiscal year, and the several trillion dollars that has been loaned to financial firms.

"And now they want to spend more money?" Boehner said. "There is some point at which we will bury our economy under a mountain of debt...at the end of the day, government growing, government spending is not going to solve this problem."

But surrounded by reporters just outside the House floor Wednesday, Obey passionately defended his comment and argued that the whole issue is much ado about nothing.

"We started to prepare options for the stimulus in August of last year and we finally got something that clicked," Obey said in reference to the $787 billion bill that passed congress last month, adding that he regrets the cuts the Senate eventually made to the bill.

"But prudence would dictate that you would anticipate that you might need other things so its a simple routine to begin to prepare possible options if you have a next requirement," he added. "Now most of the economists I talked to said its spectacularly unreasonable to expect to see this stimulus package any time soon. It takes a number of months to get out in the field and to get moving."

Lawmakers Prepare New Line-Item Veto Bill for Obama to 'Test Drive'

Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:05:31 -0500

A bipartisan group is giving the line-item veto another go at it, albeit with some key tweaks, more than a decade after the Supreme Court struck down the procedure as unconstitutional.

Sens. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., and John McCain, R-Ariz., and Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., on Wednesday will announce the introduction of a Line-Item Veto Act, which would enable the president to strike individual items like earmarks from a spending bill before signing it.

The White House has signaled that it is open to the idea. Asked about being given that authority, spokesman Robert Gibbs told reporters last week: "Well, I can assure you he'd love to take that for a test drive."

A Feingold spokesman noted that this bill is different than the law -- passed in 1996 but ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 1998 -- because it would require Congress to approve the president's vetoed package protecting Congress' constitutional authority. A simple majority in the House and Senate would be needed.

"We are proposing a line-item veto that takes a balanced approach, giving the president power to send earmarks back to Congress, and requires Congress to vote, under fast-track procedures, on whether or not those earmarks should be included in the final bill," Feingold and Ryan wrote in an op-ed in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Monday. "To guard against gridlock in Congress, the earmarks would be packaged together, rather than being treated separately."

The lawmakers say their proposal would not give the president authority to rewrite major portions of entitlement legislation and reduces the chance of political gamesmanship by preventing the president from repackaging eliminated items in a different form.

"He gets one shot for each provision he wants to cancel, and he has to act within 30 days," they wrote.

Napolitano: Violence in Mexico Not Yet Spilling Across U.S. Border

Fri, 20 Feb 2009 13:54:34 -0500

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano denied Thursday that the latest drug-fueled violence in Mexico has spilled across the border, even as local officials throughout the country see troubling signs of Mexican gang activity.

The Department of Justice reports that 230 U.S. cities, from Anchorage to Atlanta have a cartel or Mexican gang presence. A February report from the Cato Institute found a "troubling number of incidents" in which Mexico violence was spilling across the border. It also noted increasing violence against U.S. citizens traveling in the southern neighbor.

Federal authorities say more that $14 billion in illegal drugs are smuggled into the U.S. every year through Mexico. And Phoenix, the capital city of Napolitano's home state of Arizona, recorded 370 kidnappings last year, placing it only second to Mexico City worldwide, though it wasn't immediately clear how many of the kidnappings can be traced to Mexican drug activity.

Napolitano acknowledged Thursday that violence in Mexico "has risen to very high levels." But she said that although the U.S. is planning for the potential for violence to move north across the border, it hasn't happened yet.

"Right now it has not (crossed the border). But it is a contingency we have in mind because it could," the former Arizona governor told reporters. "We have contingency plans should violence spread into the United States."

The situation in Mexico is dire.

The country sees almost daily assassinations and kidnappings of government and police officials, battles frequently break out between soldiers and drug gangs involving small-arms fire and rocket-propelled grenades.

Experts warn that the violence already is on a pace to break last year's record of nearly 6,000 people killed by narco-terrorists in Mexico.

"What we have seen in Mexico is a very sobering trend. ... At the current pace, for 2009 we are looking at something in the area of 8,000 dead. It is a carnage that is alarming already," Ted Carpenter, a Cato Institute foreign policy expert, said at a forum Thursday. "Mexico has already displaced Colombia as the kidnapping capital of the world ... and the violence is spilling across the border into the United States. American citizens, including law enforcement personnel, have been targeted by the drug cartels for assassination."

President Obama discussed the latest drug violence during a meeting last month with Mexican President Felipe Calderon, whose country already has deployed 45,000 troops to fight the cartels.

The final stimulus plan Obama signed into law this week contained about $600 million to help bolster border security and curb gun flow to Mexico -- 95 percent of which come from the U.S.

The situation is so unstable the Obama administration's new director of national intelligence warned Congress last week that the Mexican government is losing control.

"The corruptive influence and increasing violence of Mexican drug cartels impedes Mexico City's ability to govern parts of its country," Dennis Bair told the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Even more alarming, the U.S. Joint Forces Command said in recent report that Mexico rivals Pakistan as the country most at risk of collapse. The report said Mexico's "politicians, police and judicial infrastructure are all under sustained assault and pressure by criminal gangs and drug cartels. ... Any descent by Mexico into chaos would demand an American response based on the serious implications for homeland security alone."

For their part, Texas authorities are preparing contingency plans for the worst-case scenario -- hundreds of thousands of Mexican refugees attempting to head north to escape the violence. The economic consequences of collapse are immense with trade between the two countries totaling $368 billion last year. Mexico also is the top supplier to the U.S. of crude oil.

But Carpenter, a longtime observer of the region, said it is unlikely that the Mexican government will fall completely.

"The fear of Mexico becoming a full-fledged failed state is somewhat exaggerated. It's unlikely the violence, as bad as it is, is going to reach that level," he said, arguing instead that the more likely scenario is Mexico will become "an informal narco-state model in which cartels become the power behind the throne."

FOX News' Mike Levine and Carl Cameron contributed to this report.

House Kills Effort to Investigate Lobbyist-Lawmaker Ties

Wed, 25 Feb 2009 18:47:59 -0500

The House voted Wednesday to kill a resolution calling for an ethics investigation into potential quid pro quo between lobbyist campaign donations and lawmakers.

Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., sponsored the proposal that would have forced the House Ethics Committee to launch a probe into ties between the source and timing of campaign contributions by lobbyists and subsequent legislator requests for special projects or earmarks.

While open-ended, Flake's resolution was a direct response to the ongoing federal investigation into the PMA Group, a lobbying company accused of making fraudulent donations to lawmakers using names of people who did not exist.

The firm, which has contributed millions to politicians in the last decade, has close ties to senior Democratic appropriators including Reps. John Murtha D-Pa., and Pete Visclosky,D-Ind. The FBI raided PMA's headquarters in November and is investigating the group's founder and president, Paul Magliochetti, a former Murtha aide.

"Whereas numerous press reports and editorials have alleged several cases of influence peddling between members of Congress and outside interests seeking federal fundingÃ¢â‚¬Â¦the House of Representatives should respond to such claims and demonstrate integrity in its proceedings," the resolution read.

The House decided to set aside the proposal by a mostly party-line 226-182 vote, though 17 Democrats joined Republicans in support of considering the measure.

The vote came just after the House approved a $410 billion spending to fund the government this year, which also contained $8.8 million on projects sought by client of the PMA lobbying group.

"Our own ethics committee may say that's OK. The Department of Justice may see it another way," Flake said following the vote. "Until we bring our Ethics Committee guidelines in line with the Justice Department, our members are exposed."

Asked why he voted with the majority to table the resolution, Murtha said, "no comment. "

FOX News' Chad Pergram contributed to this report.

GOP Congressman Intros 'Rangel Rule,' Eliminating IRS Late Fees

Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:14:49 -0500

Americans may be able to rest a little easier this April if Congressman John Carter, R-Texas gets his way.

Rep. Carter introduced a bill Wednesday to eliminate all IRS penalties and interest for paying taxes past due.

The legislation calls for the creation of what he calls the, "Rangel Rule," -- drawing attention to the recent legal issues of House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel, D-N.Y., enabling citizens who fail to pay taxes on time to do so later with no additional fees.

Rangel, who writes the country's tax policies, acknowledged last fall that he failed to pay thousands in real estate taxes for rental income he earned from a property in the Dominican Republic.

As of September 2008 the Harlem Democrat reportedly paid back more than $10,000 in taxes but that did not include any IRS penalties.

"Your citizens back home should have the same rights and benefits that come to you as a member of congress. You shouldn't be treated any differently under the law than your citizens back home," Carter said.

He added that citizens should receive the "same courtesy" that the IRS is allegedly granting Rangel and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, who also recently acknowledged a failure to pay taxes.

Carter penned a letter to Rangel earlier this month requesting that he either pay the IRS fees or join him in co-sponsoring the legislation establishing the rule.

"As Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, I believe you set an example for all American taxpayers in your dealings with the IRS, and that you must do so in a way that enforces blind justice without regard to wealth or status," he wrote in the January 6th missive.

A spokesman for the New York Democrat would not comment on the state of the tax issue, which is currently under investigation by the House Ethics Committee, but did respond to the Carter bill.

"This legislation is unnecessary. All taxpayers currently receive equal treatment under the law," Rangel spokesman Emile Milne said.

Carter, a former judge, said he is trying to focus in a what he believes is a double standard and add some levity to the debate.

"I am raising this issue not so much to just push the issue but to open the discussion. I don't think it's wrong for us to start having a free discussion in congress and with a certain amount of humor in it about how should people be treated in congress," he said.

FNS Highlights: Senator Russ Feingold: Gonzales 'Lied' to Congress

Mon, 30 Jul 2007 04:43:55 -0400

Despite calls by the White House to amend the nation's intelligence laws in order to better fight the War on Terror, a leading Senate Democrat says he remains skeptical of Bush administration intentions and what he deems an "outrageous attack on the privacy of the American people."

Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, told "FOX News Sunday" that the White House is oversimplifying calls for reform and trying force a "kitchen sink" of changes through Congress.

"They're trying to take items that go through the normal courts and put them into secret courts. They're trying to basically gut the FISA law as part of this process," Feingold said. "So it's the old game they play. They did it on the Patriot Act. They did it on military commissions where they threw all kinds of inappropriate things. They bring up something that everybody agrees on, and then they throw the kitchen sink in and try to jam it through at the last minute."

President Bush on Saturday said that American national security depends on Congress amending the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to enable the U.S. to better monitor alleged terrorist communications. He said the U.S. "can close intelligence gaps (that) provide critical warning time for our country."

Feingold said Democrats and Republicans could forge a compromise on necessary changes to the nation's laws in "one day" if the White House were more straightforward. But he called the current FISA requests "outrageous."

The three-term senator who has called for censuring the president also reiterated demands that the Justice Department appoint a special prosecutor to investigate alleged perjury by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Feingold said the outside investigation was necessary to determine whether the embattled attorney general misled Congress on details of the National Security Agency's secret surveillance program.

"Now, the truth is that the attorney general, in my view, has at least lied to Congress and may have committed perjury, and I think we need to have somebody who's able to look at both the classified and non-classified material in a way that he can actually determine whether or not criminal charges have to be pursued," he said.

While the Democrats have been investigating Gonzales for wrongdoing on a number of fronts for nearly six months, Feingold acknowledged that he has yet to discover a "smoking gun." However, he added that the inquiry will continue since Congress has yet to receive all the information it has requested. "How are you supposed to examine (all of the evidence) when you can't look at it?" he asked.

Feingold plans to introduce censure resolutions against the president this week, his second attempt to censure the president in as many years. Though his proposal has received mixed reviews among Democrats, Feingold said the bill is necessary to hold the administration for it's "shameful" record on Iraq and civil liberties.

"There needs to be some historic recognition that these things are wrong," he said. "If the Congress does nothing, what will our children and grandchildren say when they look at the historical record of an administration that has abused the American people?"

FNS Highlights: Gingrich Critiques 2008 GOP Field

Sun, 29 Jul 2007 14:07:08 -0400

Former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Sunday that the Republican presidential candidates lack the solutions to the "enormous problems" the U.S. faces, but that doesn't mean he's jumping into the race.

Gingrich did have praise for some in the GOP 2008 presidential field but said Republicans in general don't realize the extensiveness of "performance failure of government."

"I think the great dilemma of America today — and if we don't solve it, it will become a tragedy —is that the Republicans don't recognize the scale of the performance failure of government as a system, and the Democrats are living in a fantasy land in terms of their policy proposals," Gingrich told "FOX News Sunday."

"And so you have two parties, each of them disqualifying itself in different ways. Republicans are closer to reality in terms of what we ought to do for policy, but they don't understand that the system is broken, doesn't work."

The outspoken former Georgia congressman said he will make a decision whether to jump into the race in October, following his "American Solutions" conference.

"If there is a vacuum and if there's a real need for somebody to be prepared to debate Senator Clinton, then I would consider running," he said. Gingrich said he expects the Democratic ticket will contain Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama as running mates.

Gingrich praised a few of the GOP frontrunners, including potential candidate Fred Thompson, who he called "serious" and "formidable." Gingrich also confirmed reports that he and his wife had a "delightful" dinner with Thompson and his wife Jeri recently.

While he was critical of Sen. John McCain's ability to gain the GOP nod in 2008, he said Thompson, Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney would all make a "very formidable opponent" for what he expects is a Clinton-Obama Democratic ticket.

Gingrich also repeated his call for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to resign, arguing that "the president and the country are better served if the attorney general is seen as a figure of probity and a figure of integrity and a figure of competence. And sadly, the current attorney general is not seen as any of those things."

"I think that it's a liability for the president. But more importantly, it's a liability for the United States of America," he said.

Key Giuliani Adviser Sounds Off on Bush Foreign Policy Mistakes

Mon, 12 Nov 2007 17:56:30 -0500

Rudy Giuliani’s chief foreign policy adviser blasted the Bush administration for "incompetencies," accusing the White House of alienating allies, creating domestic and international ill will and failing on multiple fronts in the war on terror.

Charles Hill, the Yale University professor heading up the GOP frontrunner’s foreign policy team, pledged that a Giuliani administration would "get the job done," in an interview with FOX News last Friday.

"(Foreign policy) will begin to be operative and be successful and produce results. It will have no needless animosities, it will have none of the incompetencies that unfortunately, we have been seeing," Hill said.

Hill’s comments are the harshest criticism leveled at the current White House thus far from anyone connected to the Giuliani campaign, but campaign aides were quick to tell FOX News that Hill’s assessment represents his own opinion — not the candidate's.

They added that Giuliani greatly values Hill’s advice and counsel, and while the former New York City mayor plans to approach foreign policy in a way that will deviate from the current administration, Giuliani would refrain from using similar language.

When asked to state specific problems, Hill rattled off a list of world trouble spots and what he said are Bush policy failures.

"I'm referring to troubles we've had for three or four years in Iraq, alienation with allies, troubles in Afghanistan, lack of coordination, attentions that are needless, even within Washington," he said. "The results make it clear that we need somebody who can actually turn a situation around."

While Giuliani has offered subtle critiques regarding the lack of planning in the lead-up to the Iraq war and the necessity to step up the anti-terror effort in Afghanistan, he usually tempers his criticism, instead pointing to failures of the Clinton administration.

Giuliani says the United States places too much focus on Iraq and needs to look at the wider war on terror, dubbing it "the terrorists’ war against us," but maintains strong support for the troop surge and the current strategy in Iraq.

But despite the differences, Giuliani regularly defends the White House. He recently told New Hampshire crowds that the administration’s mistakes are often "exaggerated" and feels no need to "run against" the president.

"I don’t think we have to run away from President Bush. But we are not asking for a continuation of the Bush administration either," he said at an Oct. 28, event in Amherst, N.H. "I am not President Bush. I have a different set of ideas in many ways. I would govern in a different way. ... It’s not about continuing the Bush administration or reviving the Clinton administration. It is about the future of America."

In refraining from directly rebuking the White House during the primary race, Giuliani and the other GOP candidates almost entirely are steering clear of mentioning Bush’s name on the trail. Rather than pledging a continuation of the Bush legacy, Giuliani and the other candidates seeking the White House instead invoke the name of Ronald Reagan in lofty terms, at times making the 2008 Republican field sound more like they are running for the 1988 nomination.

Boosting for Giuliani, Hill said he is "very comprehensively and quite deeply informed" on foreign policy matters and is not "someone who needs a lot of advising."

Hill, a former aide to U.N. Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali, leads a 60- to 70-person team of regional and issue experts who offer analysis and advice to the campaign, but Hill is the only member of the group with a direct line to Giuliani.

Hill described the current international system as broken and said Giuliani is the most qualified foreign policy candidate. "I don’t think anybody else in the presidential race has any conception of this in any solid sense but Rudy Giuliani does …and he is the guy to make it work," he said.

Hill also disputes the notion that the former mayor’s policy toward the world will be aggressive or particularly unilateral as some critics fear, despite Giuliani’s vow to keep the U.S. on "offense" against terrorists.

Describing his candidate's brand of foreign policy, Hill said: "It's not aggressive, it's pragmatic, and it's 'get the job done.' And that has to be done through working with people, being cooperative, being very inclusive, bringing in people of a wide variety of opinions and making them see the commonalities among them and getting them to work together, so it is very different from that," Hill said.