Politics Daily

Obama Postpones Asian Trip to Focus on Health Care

Patricia Murphy — 2010-03-18T13:45:00+00:00

Filed under: Democrats, Barack Obama, Foreign Policy, Obama Administration, The Capitolist, Congress

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs announced Thursday that President Obama has again postponed his planned trip to Indonesia and Australia to continue his push to pass health care reform.

As Speaker Nancy Pelosi has struggled to secure the 216 votes needed to pass the bill in the House, the president has talked up the measure to the American public and has engaged in an all-out sales job to members of his own party on Capitol Hill, imploring them to vote yes for reform.

"The president greatly regrets the delay," Gibbs said. "But passage of health care reform is of paramount importance, and the president is determined to see this battle through."

Gibbs announced last week that the White House expected health care reform to pass the House by Thursday and predicted Sunday that the Democrats' proposal would be "the law of the land" before Obama left for Asia this weekend.

After initially pushing back his departure to accommodate delays in the House's progress on the bill, the White House said Thursday that Obama will reschedule the entire trip for June.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

CIA Chief Says U.S. Has al-Qaeda on the Run in Pakistan

Tom Diemer — 2010-03-18T09:57:00+00:00

Filed under: Terror, Foreign Policy, Obama Administration, International, Afghanistan

Stepped-up attacks against al-Qaeda in Pakistan's tribal regions have disrupted the terrorist network and forced its leaders to retreat to deeper hiding places, CIA Director Leon Panetta says.

Panetta, in an interview with the Washington Post, said the coordinated attacks in cooperation with the Pakistani government constitute "the most aggressive operation that the CIA has been involved in it its history."

The agency chief said one intercepted message revealed an al-Qaeda lieutenant pleading with Osama bin Laden to provide leadership.

"It is pretty clear from all the intelligence we are getting that they are having a very difficult time putting together any kind of command and control, that they are scrambling. And we really do have them on the run," he said. The U.S. has used unmanned drones to take out some al-Qaeda commanders with missile attacks.

Panetta's burst of optimism may well be warranted, but it should, in fairness, be measured against past claims that the U.S. was closing in on Bin Laden and his allies. In 2005, then-CIA Director Porter J. Goss said, "I have an excellent idea of where [bin Laden] is." And former President George W. Bush vowed in 2001 that bin Laden would be captured or killed. But the man behind the 9/11 attacks remains at large.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

St. Paddy's in Washington: Irish Chief Picks 'Quiet Week' to Visit White House

Tom Diemer — 2010-03-17T15:04:00+00:00

Filed under: Hillary Clinton, House, Barack Obama, Economy, Humor, Foreign Policy, Obama Administration, Culture, International, Afghanistan, Congress

Prime Minister Brian Cowen of Ireland didn't come up short on the blarney during his visit to the White House on Wednesday.

"We decided to come on a quiet week," Cowen told President Barack Obama. "We knew there wasn't much going on." No, not much, just a critical juncture for health care reform and passage of an $18 billion jobs bill.

Cowen, who wore a sprig of shamrock in his lapel, knew about that, of course. He also knew that the Irish prime minister has for many years been a welcome guest at the White House on St. Patrick's Day.

The taoiseach (first chief) began his day with a breakfast at Vice President Joe Biden's residence on Massachusetts Avenue, where a harpist played "The Foggy Dew," a song celebrating the Irish rebellion against the British.

At the White House, Cowen said that U.S. investment was responsible for 90,000 jobs in Ireland, a country that has been suffering through an economic downturn, similar to that of the United States, albeit on a much smaller scale.

The improved situation in Northern Ireland was also on his mind. "We are deeply grateful for the continuing and deep commitment (to the peace process) shown by the Obama administration, by the president himself, and by Secretary of State Clinton."

Obama said Ireland "punches above its weight on a whole host of critical issues" -- including the campaign to fight world hunger and providing facilities in Ireland for transport of U.S. military troops in Afghanistan.

Later at a luncheon for Cowen hosted by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Obama said "few nations so small have had such an enormous impact on another" country: in the United States 36 million people claim Irish ancestry.

Including the president, apparently. Obama informed Cowen of his own Irish bona fides. He said that he could trace his ancestry on his mother's side to County Offaly, Ireland, which happens to be taoiseach's home turf.

"I believe it was my great-great-great-great-great grandfather," Obama said to good-natured laughter. "This is true. He was a bootmaker, if I'm not mistaken."

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Virginia Terror Suspects Charged in Pakistan

Tom Diemer — 2010-03-17T12:30:00+00:00

Filed under: Crime, Terror, Foreign Policy, Culture, International, Afghanistan

Five young men from Northern Virginia, arrested in Pakistan in December, have pleaded not guilty to terrorism-related charges in Punjab province and will face trial before a special anti-terror court.

Prosecutors accused the men, ages 18 to 24, with using Pakistani soil to plot a terror attack against a friendly country, and with directing an individual or group to carry out terrorist activities. Both charges potentially carry life sentences, the Washington Post reported Wednesday. They also face other charges, including criminal conspiracy to commit attacks in Pakistan.

Pakistani authorities say the five men, who left Alexandria Va., in November without notifying their families, had been in touch with a Taliban recruiter and wanted to join al-Qaeda and fight U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

Their trial could take six months or more; Judge Anwar Nazir scheduled an evidentiary hearing on March 31. A judge will decide their fate, as Pakistan does not have jury trials.

The five are: Umar Chaudhry, 24; Ramy Zanzam, 22; Ahmad A. Minni, 20; Waqar Kahn, 22; and Aman Hassan Yemer, 18. They have denied contacting extremist groups.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Petraeus: Time to Reconsider 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'

Tom Diemer — 2010-03-16T12:21:00+00:00

Filed under: Senate, Iraq, Budget, Gay Rights, Foreign Policy, Obama Administration, Culture, Afghanistan, Congress, Ethics, Hate Crimes

Gen. David Petraeus said Tuesday the time is right to reconsider the ban on openly gay men and women serving in the military, but he cautioned a Senate committee that any change should be made in a "thoughtful manner."

Petraeus, who, as head of the U.S. Central Command, oversees the U.S. war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, said the military should assess how ending the 'Don't ask, don't tell' policy would affect recruiting, morale, unit cohesion and retention, The Hill newspaper reported. The policy, started under President Clinton, permits gays to serve in the Armed Forces as long as they keep their sexual preferences private. For its part, the military is not supposed to ask about an individual's sexual orientation.

The Obama administration wants to do away with the rule and allow gay men and lesbians to serve openly. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has begun a one-year review of how the change would be carried out.

"This is not a sound-bite issue," Petraeus said. His testimony came at a Senate Armed Services Committee budget hearing.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Hillary Clinton Rebukes Israel for Settlements Surprise During Biden Visit

Tom Diemer — 2010-03-13T14:02:00+00:00

Filed under: Hillary Clinton, Religion, Foreign Policy, Obama Administration, Culture, International

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ruffled some feathers this week with her sharp criticism of Israel after the Israeli government announced a new wave of Jewish settlements in East Jerusalem on the first day of a visit by Vice President Joe Biden.

"It was insulting," Clinton said in an interview with MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell. "And it was insulting not just to the vice president, who certainly didn't deserve that. He was there with a very clear message of commitment to the peace process, solidarity with the Isreali people. But it was an insult to the United States."

Clinton also called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Friday to express her displeasure, the State Department said.

Netanyahu, who met personally with Biden, has said he did not know beforehand that Israel's interior ministry was about to announce approval of 1,660 new homes in East Jerusalem, an area of religious significance to the many Palestinians who live there.

In Washington, Clinton's comments got the attention of the Anti-Defamation League. "We are shocked and stunned at the administration's tone and public dressing down of Israel," the ADL's Abraham Foxman said. "We cannot remember an instance when such harsh language was directed at a friend and ally of the United States."

The dust-up between the two countries comes as the U.S. attempts to broker "proximity" talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority in a bid to restart serious negotiations toward establishment of a Palestinian state. The U.S. has called for a freeze on new settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Obama Meets Haiti's President: Situation Still 'Dire' and U.S. Aid to Continue

Tom Diemer — 2010-03-10T14:52:00+00:00

Filed under: Barack Obama, Environment, Nancy Pelosi, Foreign Policy, Obama Administration, Culture, International, Congress, Harry Reid, Haiti, Mitch McConnell

President Barack Obama, meeting at the White House with Haitian President Rene Preval, said Wednesday the situation on the island nation "remains dire" and that the United States must and "will endure" in aiding the recovery and preventing a second disaster from heavy rains and flooding.

"People should be under no illusions that the crisis is over," Obama said as he stood next to Preval in the White House Rose Garden. "Many Haitians are still in need, desperate need in some cases, of shelter and food and medicine. And with the spring rains approaching, those needs will only grow. The challenge now is to prevent a second disaster."

Much of Haiti is still in ruins from the Jan. 12 earthquake which killed an estimated 230,000 people. With so much of the infrastructure damaged or missing, relief officials fear that flooding during the approaching rainy season could wreak havoc on temporary shelters, feeding centers and medical facilities.

Already, Preval said rains have caused the deaths of 15 people. "Our priorities are, first and foremost ... protection of those people who today are homeless and must be relocated," he said.

Speaking in French, Preval said the continuing threat of earthquakes, tsunamis, and global warming should be a "concern for the entire planet." The Haitian president favors creation of a "red helmet" force within the United Nations that could respond quickly to natural disasters across the globe.

The two leaders took no questions from reporters. But Preval also visited Capitol Hill to meet with Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

The United States has thrown more than 20,000 military and civilian personnel and millions of dollars into the rescue and recovery effort. Although U.S. military units will begin pulling back, Obama said thousands of Americans remain on the scene at the invitation of the Hatian government.

Obama said an international donors' conference hosted by the United Nations later this month will present an opportunity to guarantee "a coordinated and sustained effort in Haiti." The president thanked Americans involved in rescue and relief operations and again expressed sorrow that more than 100 American citizens were among the dead in Haiti.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Gates Hints Afghan Pullout Could Start Before July 2011

Tom Diemer — 2010-03-10T11:15:00+00:00

Filed under: Terror, Foreign Policy, Obama Administration, National Security, Afghanistan

Defense Secretary Robert Gates, in an unannounced visit to Afghanistan, raised the possibility Wednesday that some U.S. troops could begin leaving the country before the July 2011 deadline for withdrawal.

Gates hedged his bets and did not elaborate. "We will begin that transition no later than July 2011, but the pace will depend also on conditions on the ground," he said, according to CNN.

President Obama ordered 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan last year and coalition forces are in the midst of an offensive against Taliban fighters.

The defense secretary toured training camps in eastern Afghanistan, observing exercises at Camp Blackhorse, where U.S. and British forces are working with Afghan soldiers.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

In Israel, Biden Condemns East Jerusalem Settlements

Christopher Weber — 2010-03-09T17:19:00+00:00

Filed under: Joe Biden, Foreign Policy, Obama Administration

Vice President Joe Biden released a statement shortly after arriving in Israel Tuesday that condemns a decision by the government to allow new settlements in disputed east Jerusalem.

Israel's announcement of the construction of 1,600 new homes for Jews in east Jerusalem came just hours after Biden met with President Shimon Peres and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

"The substance and timing of the announcement, particularly with the launching of proximity talks, is precisely the kind of step that undermines the trust we need right now and runs counter to the constructive discussions that I've had here in Israel," Biden said in a statement released by the White House. "We must build an atmosphere to support negotiations, not complicate them."

U.S. Middle East peace envoy George Mitchell would act an an intermediary between the Israelis and Palestinians in the indirect proximity talks.

Biden is in the Middle East to reassure Israelis that the U.S. will stand in the way of Iran's nuclear program. He also wants to prod Israel to resume peace talks with Palestinians, who oppose the settlements.

At their meeting earlier, Biden told Peres there "is absolutely no space between the United States and Israel in terms of Israel's security."

Here is Biden's full statement on the planned settlements:

"I condemn the decision by the government of Israel to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem. The substance and timing of the announcement, particularly with the launching of proximity talks, is precisely the kind of step that undermines the trust we need right now and runs counter to the constructive discussions that I've had here in Israel. We must build an atmosphere to support negotiations, not complicate them. This announcement underscores the need to get negotiations under way that can resolve all the outstanding issues of the conflict. The United States recognizes that Jerusalem is a deeply important issue for Israelis and Palestinians and for Jews, Muslims and Christians. We believe that through good faith negotiations, the parties can mutually agree on an outcome that realizes the aspirations of both parties for Jerusalem and safeguards its status for people around the world. Unilateral action taken by either party cannot prejudge the outcome of negotiations on permanent status issues. As George Mitchell said in announcing the proximity talks, "we encourage the parties and all concerned to refrain from any statements or actions which may inflame tensions or prejudice the outcome of these talks.""

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

In Middle East, Biden Vows 'No Space' Between U.S., Israel on Security

Tom Diemer — 2010-03-09T08:46:00+00:00

Filed under: Iraq, Iran, Religion, Joe Biden, Foreign Policy, Obama Administration, National Security, International, 2010 Elections, Nuclear Proliferation, Unemployment

Vice President Joe Biden, arriving in Jerusalem on Tuesday, told Israeli President Shimon Peres there "is absolutely no space between the United States and Israel in terms of Israel's security."

Biden, who also met with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is in the Middle East to reassure Israelis that the U.S. will stand in the way of Iran's nuclear program. He also wants to prod Israel and the Palestinians to resume peace talks.

The vice president, a longtime friend of Israel's, signed the guest book in Peres' residence: "The bond between our two countries has been and will remain unshakable. Only together can we achieve lasting peace in the region. I take comfort in knowing that you will be our partner in achieving this goal. May God continue to bless this great nation of Israel and its people. You are a great man."

Peres said he remembered when the vice president first visited his nation as the youngest member of the Senate, and said of his visit this week, "We were waiting for you." Biden was elected from Delaware the age of 29.

"The United States should lead the Iranian policy," Peres told Biden. "There is nobody else in the world."

Biden met separately with Netanyahu, who told the vice president, "The bonds are unbreakable." Biden, in prepared remarks, said, "The United States will always stand with those who take risks for peace."

Biden's trip to Israel comes as vote-counting continues in Iraq for results of Sunday's parliamentary elections. Despite violence meant to intimidate voters, turnout was reported at 62 percent, the Washington Post said, higher than balloting in last year 's provincial contests, though somewhat below the 2005 national elections. Turnout was especially high in Sunni-dominated provinces, a sign that the religious minority may be buying into the Democratic process.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Mitt Romney, Jason Altmire and John Adler on Fox News Sunday

Bruce Drake — 2010-03-07T13:39:00+00:00

Filed under: Mitt Romney, Health Care, Foreign Policy

"FOX NEWS SUNDAY"

MARCH 7, 2010

SPEAKERS: CHRIS WALLACE, HOST

FORMER GOV. MITT ROMNEY, R-MASS.

REP. JASON ALTMIRE, D-PA.

REP. JOHN ADLER, D-N.J.

[

*] WALLACE: I'm Chris Wallace. Election day in Iraq -- that story next on "Fox News Sunday."

Mitt Romney, the once and perhaps future presidential candidate, speaks out on President Obama, the economy and whether Washington can solve America's problems. Mitt Romney, only "Fox News Sunday."

Then, President Obama pressures congressional Democrats to pass health care reform. But can he get members who voted "no" last time to vote "yes" now? We'll ask two of them, Pennsylvania Congressman Jason Altmire, and John Adler of New Jersey.

And we'll ask our Sunday panel how important today's Iraqi election is for the future of that country and plans to pull out U.S. troops, all right now on "Fox News Sunday."

And hello again from Fox News in Washington. Before we get to our interview with Mitt Romney, we want to tell you about the election for a new government in Iraq.

Polls have just closed in that country. For much of the day, turnout was lower than expected because insurgents across Iraq used roadside bombs and mortars to kill at least 25 and to keep people away from the polls.

For more, let's bring in Fox News reporter Malini Wilkes live from Baghdad.

Malini?

CORRESPONDENT MALINI WILKES: Chris, we heard the explosions all morning but it leveled off by afternoon. It looks like the violence did suppress voter turnout, at least in the early hours. By midday the election commission held a press conference reminding people, "You still have time to get out there," and lifting a vehicle ban to encourage turnout.

Voters who did go to the polls found wide perimeters and tight security.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

WILKES: Multiple pat-down searches beginning several blocks from the polls and, as promised, no U.S. troops in sight. Whole families showed up to cast ballots together.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VOTER: We came to vote today to challenge the terrorists.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WILKES: This is the first I.D. check, and the U.N. says this is one of the best antifraud measures. Every voter name has to go with a specific polling location, but if you can't find your name on this list, you can still cast a provisional ballot.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WILKES: International observers at this site seemed satisfied by what they saw.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

INTERNATIONAL OBSERVER: We're looking to make sure that people, when they come in, are properly registered, that -- if they're registered that they -- they go to the proper place to vote, that they vote only once.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WILKES: Political parties and coalitions are also allowed to have observers watching the vote. Today's election is certainly a milestone but just a first step in a long process. It could take months before the new parliament chooses a prime minister and forms a government.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WILKES: U.S. commanders have predicted elevated violence in this time that the new government coalesces but they say they can still stay on track to draw down to 50,000 U.S. troops by the end of August.

Critical choices for voters -- will they go with more religious candidates or more secular ones? No one single coalition is likely to have a majority, so they will have to make alliances across party and sectarian lines to form a government.

We expect the first official preliminary results within three or four days. Chris, back to you.

WALLACE: Malini Wilkes, reporting live from Baghdad.

Malini, thanks for that.

With growing talk this will be a good year for Republicans, former governor Mitt Romney is offering his plan for the GOP.

He's written a new book called "No Apology: The Case for American Greatness." It's a searing critique of President Obama and may just lay out the platform for another presidential run in 2012. And Governor Romney joins us now from Miami.

Governor, let's start with that title of your book, "No Apology," which is clearly a response to what you call President Obama's "American apology tour."

In the book, you write this, "President Obama has positioned himself as a figure transcending America instead of defending America. What makes his speeches jump out at his audience are the steady stream of criticisms, put-downs and jabs directed at the nation he was elected to represent and defend." Governor, is that fair to say about a president who has escalated the U.S. involvement in Afghanistan and who has launched more drone attacks in one year than President Bush did in eight?

ROMNEY: Chris, I think the president made an enormous error in the beginning of his administration by going across the world, starting in Muslim lands, and saying that America has been derisive, dismissive, arrogant, that we have not listened to the concerns of others, that America has dictated to other nations.

Simply saying words like that are, one, wrong, because America has freed other nations from dictators, not dictated to them. And it also adds fuel to the fire of those who are part of the "blame America" crowd. I saw even Ahmadinejad is now saying 9/11 is a fabrication.

These sorts of voices should not receive any kind of support from the words of the president of the United States. But I can tell you that I am glad that the president reversed course in Iraq. He didn't pull our troops out like he said during the campaign.

He likewise supported our surge efforts in Afghanistan, having voted against the surge in Iraq. And I'm glad also that he has extended the Patriot Act. So he has done some things right, but his "apology tour" was one of the things he did very, very badly.

WALLACE: Now, on the domestic side, you call the president and Democrats, quote, "neo-monarchists," and you say that they would replace a culture of opportunity with a culture of dependency. Explain what you mean.

ROMNEY: Well, you know, from the very beginning of the country there was a great debate about whether we would be a nation led by a king or a strong central government, or instead whether we would pursue a course where individuals followed their dreams.

And the chaos associated with free enterprise and freedom was deemed by the founders to be a greater potential source of strength than having a central government that told us what to do.

But in Washington today, among President Obama and many liberals, there's a view that if there's a problem in America, government can solve it best. And the example, of course, is health care.

We do have problems in health care, but the idea that government can step in and take over the health care system, and tell insurers and providers and doctors and hospitals how to do a better job -- that, in my view, is as silly as saying that we want to have the folks who run the post office and Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and Amtrak running one-fifth of our economy.

WALLACE: Governor, I want to pick up on this, because we got a lot of e-mail from conservatives this week who said that you are the wrong man to be making that point, and they pointed specifically to your role in passing health care reform in Massachusetts. In your book, you criticize actions by your successor, Governor Patrick, but then you write this, and let's put it up on the screen. "Even with these added costs and policy choices by the legislature and the new governor, the plan is working."

But let's look at the record. According to the Wall Street Journal, average Massachusetts health care premiums are now the highest in the nation. Per capita health spending is 27 percent higher than the national average. And fiscal 2010 costs are $47 million over budget. Is that your idea of, quote, "the plan is working?"

ROMNEY: Well, let's go back and look at the facts. First of all, Massachusetts had very high health care costs before our plan was put in place. And what our plan did was focus on getting everybody insured. And that it's done. Some 98 percent of Massachusetts individuals have insurance.

And since the plan has been put in place, premiums for those individuals have risen at 5 percent per year, pretty substantially below the kind of numbers you're seeing across the nation.

And I think you could also recognize that we have work to do, which is to bring down the cost of health care throughout the country. That's a big issue, something we tackled for the people who were uninsured in the past because we got premiums down for them. But getting premiums down for the entire population is now the next responsibility.

Let me tell you, there's a big difference between what we did and what President Obama is doing. What we did, I think, is the ultimate conservative plan. We said people have to take responsibility for getting insurance, if they can afford it, or paying their own way. No more free-riders. And we solved this at the state level -- not a federal plan, but a state plan.

This is a federalist nation. States should be able to solve their own problems. We didn't raise taxes. We did not at the same time cut Medicare and expect our seniors to have to pay for all this. We didn't do what President Obama's doing, which is putting controls on our system of premiums for private insurance companies.

And let me just tell you, I think our plan is working well. And perhaps the best thing I can say about it is that it is saving lives. It is the ultimate pro-life effort, if you will, because people who otherwise could have lost their lives are now able to get the kind of care that they deserve.

WALLACE: But, Governor, let's look at the plan that you signed into law in Massachusetts in 2006. You have an individual mandate. You have an employer mandate. You have subsidiaries for some of the uninsured. You set minimum insurance coverage standards.

Again, a lot of e-mails I got from conservatives say -- make this point. They say it sure sounds an awful lot like "Obama-care." ROMNEY: A big difference -- a state plan versus a federal plan. No new taxes, unlike his plan. No cut in Medicare, unlike his plan. And no controls over insurance premiums, price controls, cost controls like his plan. So very, very different in that regard.

It's the difference between a racehorse and a donkey, if you will, so -- they both have four legs, but one works pretty well and the other's not working and would not work at all.

And a couple other things. The facts of those features are not exactly right. The plan this year, for instance, is $80 million below budget. It's coming in very much within the range that was forecast when the legislature and I put this together.

And there were some features that I didn't like that the legislature put in place, for instance -- the provision that said that insurance companies are told what kinds of coverages have to be included. That's something I vetoed. They overrode it. That's the nature of a -- of a bipartisan process.

And let me tell you one thing I'm also proud of. We were able to do in our state something which is not being done in Washington. And that is we worked on a bipartisan basis. Republicans and Democrats came together. And we worked out something which we thought was pretty good and, on my view, a step forward.

But you know, the states were designed to be the laboratories of democracy. This is an example where people can take a good look, see what they like, what they don't like.

But the idea of taking what we did and applying something entirely different to the entire nation is not the right approach. And I think that's why President Obama is seeing the kind of resistance that he's experiencing.

WALLACE: Yeah, but I want to pursue this, if I may, Governor. The libertarian, and certainly the somewhat conservative, Cato Institute says that your plan in Massachusetts is a mirror -- a mirror plan of "Obama-care." They say it's quite right you didn't raise taxes, but they say, in fact, you got millions of dollars from the federal government to finance your plan.

ROMNEY: Well, what we have is a plan which is paid for half by the state and half by the federal government. The cost is about 1.5 percent of the state budget.

And the federal dollars we received were federal dollars that we were entitled to through a program called DISH, the disproportionate share program. Federal funds had been applied to Massachusetts, just like to other states, for the care of those that were uninsured.

We said, "Let's take that money that's been going to hospitals that are caring for the uninsured and instead help people buy their own private insurance." No government insurance. No government option, if you will.

WALLACE: Well, there's no...

ROMNEY: Private health insurance.

WALLACE: ... government option in the Obama plan anymore, either.

ROMNEY: No, that's right. That's right. And so what we did was entirely different than what President Obama is proposing on the bases that I'm taking you through.

And again, I like the idea of letting states solve their problems one by one and find the best alternative. I think we're the first state in the -- in the nation that found a way to get everybody insured without having to raise taxes.

We do insist that people buy insurance or pay their own way. And if they -- if they don't buy insurance, they'll find that their taxes are higher. The employer mandate is pretty soft. An employer pays -- I think it's $285 a year if an employee doesn't have insurance that they bought on their own or if they bought through the company.

So it's a plan that has pros and cons. The biggest pro, in my view, is that we don't have free riders now expecting other people to pay for their health care costs. And we're also able to have individuals who otherwise would not have the kind of specialty care they need receiving treatment.

One of the members of my administration told me just two days ago that after she left our administration, she was diagnosed with brain cancer and that had she not been in Massachusetts, she would not been able to receive the insurance that she needed and the specialist care that has now saved her life. That's the biggest reason for helping people get insurance.

WALLACE: Governor, I want to -- I want to press this just one more time on a different angle. This week you went after President Obama for his attacks on insurance companies. Let's take a look at that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROMNEY: The president has really been disingenuous by trying to lay this at the feet of the insurance companies. No one believes that health care is expensive in America because of insurance companies.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALLACE: Now, Democrats point out that, in fact, Anthem Blue Cross of California just wanted to raise its insurance premiums in California by 39 percent. They pulled it back only under pressure.

And there's a new report -- you, of course, know the markets. Goldman Sachs has a new analysis that suggests that people buy shares of a couple of insurance companies because they say rates are going up and competition is going down. And a Democratic Party spokesman the other day said this, and we'll put it on the screen. "It's becoming crystal clear whose side Mitt Romney is on, and it's not yours, unless, of course, you are an insurance company or a Wall Street bank. Then he's on your side."

Governor?

ROMNEY: Chris, the president is scapegoating. It's something which he is fond to do any time one of his programs gets in trouble. He decides to pick a target and say, "This is the cause of America's problem," whether that's Wall Street, or Goldman Sachs, or bankers, or wealthy people, or whether it's insurance companies.

And as I pointed out in the same address that you quoted a little later in the speech, I think one sentence later, there are insurance companies that are doing bad things. They should be pointed out and targeted.

But to suggest that the overall health care cost of America, which, by the way, is dramatically higher than any other nation in the world, is because of the insurance companies is obviously quite silly.

Our health care costs are very, very high because we use a lot of health treatments. Hospitals, doctors, MRIs, surgeries and so forth are more extensively used and far more expensive in this country than they are in many other countries.

It's not the insurance companies that are driving our health care cost up and up. The reason their premiums are going up is because doctor bills and hospital bills and usage and so forth is also going up.

But again, if there's some bad actors in there among health insurance companies, and I'm sure there must be a number of them with 1,000 or so companies in America, point them out, go after them, put their feet to the fire.

But don't pretend that the Obama health care plan is simply about going after insurance companies. It's about taking over the health care system and making choices that people would rather make themselves.

WALLACE: Governor, let's talk a little politics. In your book you use a line from your father, George Romney, who, of course, was the governor of Michigan, saying -- he was talking about his campaign, but you use it talking about your 2008 presidential campaign, comparing it to a miniskirt, saying it was short and revealing.

What did your last run reveal to you?

ROMNEY: Well, you've got to make sure that the message that is your heart and soul breaks through all of the clutter that comes in the debates, all the questions you get there. The ads that you run have to make sure they're on target.

You know, I think most people who run for office felt the way I did, which is that what they really wanted to say, what they really wanted to communicate, was not exactly what came through. That's one of the advantages of writing a book, is that you get the chance to really lay out what you're really concerned about.

And frankly, I'm very, very concerned that America is on a severely wrong track, that if America doesn't change course that we're going to kill the American dream for our kids and our grandkids, that we're going to get surpassed by other nations.

And that's why I wrote the book, which is to lay out precisely what I think we have to do in everything from energy, education, taxes, deficit spending, the debt we've racked up through entitlements.

We're going to have to make some dramatic changes in America or we're going to find ourselves being weakened. And this president is not doing that job. He's not taking the action that needs to be taken to make America strong in the face of the kind of challenges we have.

WALLACE: Governor, one thing...

ROMNEY: So a good lesson for me from the campaign -- get that message out.

WALLACE: If I may, one thing that I noticed in reading your book is you talk at great length and in great detail about foreign policy, the economy, domestic affairs, but there are just two paragraphs on abortion, and you barely mention either gun rights or gay marriage. How come?

ROMNEY: Well, this is a book about what we need to do to strengthen America globally and make sure that our geopolitical position and military position is stronger and that our economy is able to provide the jobs that we need for the -- for the coming century. And our failures in those areas are extreme, and that's why -- that's why I wrote the book.

Other issues, social issues, I don't go into much -- in much depth, in part because there are not a lot of new arguments that I know of to raise in that regard. There are a lot of things I didn't talk about in a lot of depth.

Homeland security is another where I barely touch on it, but that's because the focus of this book is on the challenge which a great nation like ours reaches when we're at the pinnacle and when other nations like China and Russia and even the jihadist movement in certain parts of the world of Islam attack America or, in case of China and Russia, compete with us for global leadership.

That's why -- that's why I focused as I have on the topics that I take on.

WALLACE: But let me pick up on it in this sense. One of, I think it's fair to say, your biggest problems in 2008 was the fact that you had changed your position on a lot of social issues -- gay rights, abortion. And some people questioned whether or not you were a flip-flopper.

Are you done being a culture warrior if you decide to go ahead and run in 2012?

ROMNEY: Well, first, I'll take exception. I did change my view on abortion. I did not change my view on same-sex marriage.

But that being said, there's no question in my view but that the social issues that this country considers and that are very much in debate today are very important to the nature of America and who we are.

And I continue to believe very deeply, as I have in that last campaign described, that marriage must be defended. I think it's under attack. I speak at great length in the book about the importance of marriage prior to children.

And I believe that being pro-life is a very important feature of the American culture, and that's something I will continue to defend.

WALLACE: Governor, we've got less than two minutes left. Given the fact that, one, you make it clear you don't think this president is doing much of a job; two, during an earlier interview this week your wife Ann said, "Go storm the castle, sweetie," why wouldn't you run for president in 2012?

ROMNEY: Well, you know, I don't really have the pros and cons laid out yet, Chris. It's something which we won't have to decide until some time after the November elections.

My guess is after those elections are over and we see where the country is, and we see the features in our own lives that may affect a decision like that, we'll sit down and make a decision. But I can't tell you exactly when it'll be. And I can't tell you what final course we'll take.

But I can tell you that I'm going to continue to battle to keep America strong. I'm very, very concerned that our -- that the foundations of America's strength -- our culture, our education, our energy dependence, our productivity as a nation, our military strength -- that all those things are under attack and that Washington is taking us down the -- a course of weakness. And I'm going to keep fighting to strengthen America.

WALLACE: Governor Romney, thank you. Thanks for talking with us today. And please come back, sir.

ROMNEY: Thanks, Chris. Good to be with you.

WALLACE: Up next, the president pushes Democrats to pass health care reform. We'll talk with two congressmen who need to be won over.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WALLACE: It's no exaggeration to say our next guests will be among the most powerful people in Washington the next few weeks. They are House Democrats who voted "no" on health care reform the first time around, and the president needs a number of them to switch their votes to "yes" if his plan is to have any chance for passage.

Jason Altmire is a second-term congressman from Pennsylvania. John Adler is a first-term member from New Jersey.

And, Congressmen, welcome to "Fox News Sunday."

(UNKNOWN): Thanks, Chris.

WALLACE: Both of you, as we say, voted against health care reform in the House in November because you both said that you felt that it failed to contain costs.

Are you satisfied -- and we'll start with you, Congressman Altmire. Are you satisfied with the Senate bill? Will you vote for it?

ALTMIRE: I need to see the recreation package. That's the key component -- the amendment to the Senate bill. But there's no question in my mind the Senate bill was much stronger than the House bill on cost containment, and it did away with some of the things in the House bill that I was concerned about, the income tax increase and the employer mandate.

So I think we have a much better product to work with, but I need to see the CBO score on the finished package and the revisions.

WALLACE: All right. We're going to talk about the revisions in a minute. But I get the sense, Congressman, that you are leaning towards switching your vote.

ALTMIRE: Well, I wouldn't say that. I have an open mind. I'm considering the bill. I am talking to my constituents in this process, too. They're a big part of this. But in the end, I have to make a decision between passing this bill -- this is the finish line -- or doing nothing. And I'm weighing the balance between the two.

WALLACE: Congressman Adler?

ADLER: Well, I think we actually have to know what the bill says. I'm one of these guys that believes I should read the bill first before I make up my mind.

Having said that, I think there were some pieces in the Senate bill that were missing. The House bill also, I think, failed to address cost containment. So I'm worried about my businesses in my district, around the country, and whether they can afford to pay for insurance for their employers or whether it'll go up 20 percent a year as they have for the last several years.

If the House and the Senate can't work out cost containment, I don't see how I could support a bill that doesn't help our business community and create more jobs.

WALLACE: I get the impression -- I failed with Congressman Altmire. I get the impression you're leaning no.

ADLER: Well, we need health care reform. I'm not sure the bills coming through the House and Senate really address health care reform, delivery reform, and that involves cost containment and changing the way we reimburse for fee-for-service system.

I think we don't have a good system in some ways, even though health care is good for a lot of Americans. And I'm not sure we've gone far enough in terms of fixing the underlying system to make it affordable for businesses and for taxpayers.

WALLACE: All right. Let's talk about fixes. For health care reform to pass, first of all, you in the House would have to pass the Senate bill as-is. Then you would have to pass what you're calling the fixed bill, the reconciliation bill, which would have a number of changes in it to the Senate bill.

Let me ask you first of all, Congressman Altmire, because we've seen this happen before, where the House passes something and it dies in the Senate, do you trust the Senate to pass the reconciliation bill?

ALTMIRE: The Senate has given us a lot of reason not to trust them. Certainly, that's a key component of the dynamic of getting the votes -- is there has to be some certainty that the Senate is going to follow through on their part.

WALLACE: So that would give you some concern, then, about just passing the Senate bill and wondering whether the fix will ever go through the Senate.

ALTMIRE: It gives me concern, but look. My constituents put me in Washington to cast tough votes on their behalf. I'm not afraid to take the vote. But certainly, for it to pass, the Senate's going to have to follow through.

WALLACE: Specifically, Congressman Altmire, what fixes, two or three key fixes, do you need to see in this, quote, "reconciliation" bill for you to go along with this whole package?

ALTMIRE: I need to see a much clearer picture of the cost containment, bringing down the cost of health care for people who have it now.

The bill does a good job on insurance reforms, making sure that you can't do preexisting conditions exclusions and the rest.

It does a good job on coverage, getting the young and healthy people into the system and improving access.

The House bill didn't do such a good job on bringing down the cost for people who have it now.

WALLACE: So tell me one specific thing you would like to see in the fixes.

ALTMIRE: Value-based purchasing, bundling.

WALLACE: All right, which means what?

ALTMIRE: Quality, reimbursing based on the quality of care, not quantity of care. Right now, the doctor gets reimbursed every time you come to see them. Every test they run, every procedure they order, they make more money. I think they should be reimbursed based on the quality of care, not quantity.

WALLACE: But, Congressman Adler -- and I get the sense that's the kind of thing -- you nodded -- that you would like to see. I mean, there was talk about that for a year and they never got it done. I think the chances that they're going to do that kind of wholesale addition or change to the Senate bill is very unlikely in the -- in the reconciliation process.

ADLER: Well, you've got people like Jason and me that are raising that issue in a very clear way. I think we have some leverage to try to make a better bill that actually really meets the needs of America's taxpayers, America's patients and America's business community as insurance purchases for years to come.

There are a bunch of pilot projects in the bill. If instead of having them be pilot projects we actually mandated that the good pilot projects were implemented to save money, to improve outcomes for patients, and to save money for people buying insurance, that would be something that would really serve America's economy well for years to come.

WALLACE: Congressman Altmire, you are pro-life, but you voted against the House bill even with the Stupak amendment, which really very sharply limited -- some would say banned -- any use of federal funds for anything that would approach subsidizing abortion.

How big an issue do you think abortion is going to be in deciding whether or not this passes the House?

ALTMIRE: Well, I think given the vote dynamic, abortion may be the decisive issue. There is a block of voters who voted for the Stupak amendment -- I voted for the Stupak amendment -- who say that they're not going to vote for the finished product unless they tighten the abortion language that's in the Senate bill. So we may see some vote holdouts based on that issue.

WALLACE: Let's talk -- as I mentioned at the beginning, only half kidding, you are going to be two of the most important people in Washington over the next few weeks.

Let me start with you, Congressman Adler. What kind of attention slash pressure are you getting from the White House and from the House to go along and switch your vote?

ADLER: I will tell you I've had a very respectful conversation with the president some weeks ago about cost containment. He seemed to understand what I was talking about and really wanted to try to fix things that -- as I was laying out.

I've spoken with the speaker. She had been very gracious in considering my comments. I think she's looking elsewhere for votes right now.

But we have to find a way to solve America's real problems. Health care costs are one of those problems. I'm not sure that's adequately addressed yet in the bill that's being talked about.

WALLACE: Have they given you any specific commitment that they're going to do something that you asked for?

ADLER: Frankly, I'm not feeling pressure from the people in the Washington. I'm feeling pressure from people in my district to try to meet needs for business people, to try to create a stronger economy, get people back to work. That's what I'm about.

WALLACE: Congressman Altmire, what kind of pressure are you getting? And are you getting any offers of, "Gee, maybe we could do something for your district?"

ALTMIRE: I haven't gotten any offers unrelated to health care policy. I've been involved in this from the start. I'm on one of the committees of jurisdiction. Health care is my professional background. So for me, it's a continuing conversation.

And I have spoken with the president about it very recently. And again, it's all on policy. It's what my concerns are in the bill. And in the end, again, this is going to come down to whether or not we do nothing or whether or not we pass the bill.

I think the worst possible thing we could do is pass a bill that makes the system worse. But a very close second is to do nothing, because if we do nothing, business owners are going to continue to see double-digit rate increases. Seniors are going to continue to see Medicare increases.

WALLACE: All right. We've got a couple of minutes left. I want to talk some politics. Some would say we've been talking it all along.

Congressman Adler, you come from a district that had not, prior to you, had a Democratic congressman -- I think it was for more than 100 years. So question: If you switch from a "no" vote on health care reform -- you know, because a lot of people aren't going to get all the nuances -- to a "yes" vote, don't you put a big target on your back come November?

ADLER: Chris, I think the politics of all this will work itself out. I think I was elected to do what was right, to represent my district and help our country for a two-year term. That's what I'm focused on.

So I'm not worried about election stuff. I'm worried about trying to help the business community, taxpayers, and our future as a society.

WALLACE: Congressman Altmire, you're one of the Democrats who won in 2008 in a district that John McCain also carried. Wouldn't switching your vote from "no" to "yes" give Republicans a big argument to use against you?

ALTMIRE: Using the word "switch" implies that this is the same bill. As I outlined, this is a very different finished product than where we were the first time we voted on this in November.

Number one for me is where my constituents are. I'm not going to cast a vote that my constituents aren't comfortable with. I feel like they want health care reform. There is a level of unease with this package. And it's my job to talk with them about it and cast a vote on their behalf.

WALLACE: And finally, quickly, the president has staked enormous prestige -- some people say he's all in -- on this issue.

Starting can with you, Congressman Altmire, are you prepared to hand the president a huge defeat by defeating health care?

ALTMIRE: I was sent here to represent my constituents. And what I'm doing is trying to impact the debate so that we can have a bill that I can vote for. I've told the president what my concerns are. If the finished product is something I can pass, I'll vote for it. If it's not, then I'm not going to be able to support it.

WALLACE: And no way you're leaning at this point?

ALTMIRE: No, I want to see the finished product. I need to see the CBO score.

WALLACE: And, Congressman Adler, are you prepared to give the president a defeat that would substantially weaken his standing?

ADLER: I think this should be about trying to create jobs for the unemployed in our country, helping our business community, making sure that the soldiers and Marines overseas finish their job in Afghanistan and Iraq.

I wouldn't say this is the only issue facing America. I'm supposed to do what I think is right for my district and my country. WALLACE: Congressman Altmire, Congressman Adler, thank you both so much for coming in. We and a lot of other people will be watching to see how you vote.

Mar 07, 2010 11:38 ET
Source: CQ Transcriptions
(C) 2010, Congressional Quarterly Inc., All Rights Reserved

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Iraq Bombings Rattle Muslim Holy City on Election Eve

Tom Diemer — 2010-03-06T19:11:00+00:00

Filed under: Iraq, Iran, Religion, Terror, Foreign Policy, International, 2010 Elections

At least three people were killed and dozens more wounded in Iraq Saturday as a car bomb went off near buses carrying pilgrims in the holy city of Najaf -- an outbreak of violence coming on the eve of parliamentary elections.

The bomb exploded near the Safi al-Safa shrine, gutting two buses and injuring 54, including a number of Iranians, the Washington Post said, citing security and health officials. Iranian pilgrims were also said to be among the dead.

"We think it is a political targeting of Najaf province..." the Post quoted Adnan al-Zurfi, governor of the southern province, as saying. "This targeting aims to scare people."

Iraqi security officers were on alert hoping to stop violence meant to intimidate prospective voters in advance of balloting on Sunday.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Haitian President Preval to Visit White House

Tom Diemer — 2010-03-06T11:44:00+00:00

Filed under: Barack Obama, Foreign Policy, Obama Administration, Culture, International, Haiti

Haitian President Rene Preval will meet with President Barack Obama in Washington on Wednesday to provide an update on recovery and rebuilding efforts on the battered island nation.

The White House said Friday that Obama, in a White House meeting, will assure Preval of the U.S. commitment and also discuss on-going aide and rebuilding efforts as Haiti picks itself up from the Jan.12 earthquake that killed some 220,000 people and caused up to $14 billion in damages.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Titanic Survivors Study: A Closer Look at Self-Preservation

Ria Misra — 2010-03-03T16:20:00+00:00

Filed under: Foreign Policy, Woman Up, International, Haiti

You're on a sinking ship and you have just 10 minutes to make a decision: Do you save yourself, or do you help the other passengers to safety?
Now, imagine the same scenario, except you have two hours longer to make your decision. Do you make the same choice? Maybe not, according to a study published in the journal Proceedings of the Natural Academy of Sciences.

Researchers from the University of Zurich, the Center for Research in Economics, and Queensland University compared the survivor profiles of passengers from two famous shipwrecks, the Titanic and the Lusitania, to see how they differed. In many ways, these two ships were similar: both were large passenger ships and both sank in the early 1900s. But, there is one major difference: The Titanic sank slowly, over a period of 2 hours 40 minutes, while the Lusitania slipped beneath the waters in a matter of just 18 minutes. And that difference in time had a huge impact on who survived -- a discrepancy researchers attribute to passengers on the Lusitania acting instinctively in self-preservation, and on the Titanic, passengers first helping other passengers.On the Titanic, children were about 15 percent more likely to survive and women approximately 50 percent more likely to survive than men on the ship. Young men were more likely to die on the Titanic, but on the Lusitania, young men were almost 8 percent more likely to survive than other passengers. Researchers attribute the difference to the extra time -- just 2 hours 22 minutes -- in which they say that social norms ("women and children first") made it more likely that they were given seats on lifeboats.

But, while the extra time may have made women and children more likely to receive aid, whether these findings can be extrapolated or applied to aid in other disasters -- especially natural disasters -- is another matter. In some cases it seems that the longer the crisis goes on, the more trouble women and children may have in actually receiving aid.

Following the earthquake in Haiti, the World Health Organization's Pan American division issued a statement of concern that, in the sometimes disorganized struggle to get to limited supplies of food, water and medicine sent as part of aid packages, women and children were being shouldered aside. And the World Food Programme ended up organizing some food distributions just for women in response to worries that food in the initial aid packages simply wasn't making it to them or to their households. Additionally, women in Haiti were more likely to fall victim to violent attacks after the earthquake.

Figuring out the best way to distribute aid in a disaster is hardly an exact science. But the results of the study are a good reminder that -- if we want to make sure that aid delivers the maximum benefit -- considering what is happening socially is also a necessity.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Earthquake Rocks Chile; Tsunami Feared in Pacific

Tom Diemer — 2010-02-27T18:51:00+00:00

Filed under: Foreign Policy, Obama Administration, National Security, Culture, International

A powerful earthquake rocked Chile early Saturday killing at least 214 people and unleashing a tsunami which began rolling across the Pacific Ocean.

President Obama called the quake "devastating" and said the tsunami could hit American shores at Hawaii, Guam and American Samoa. Waves -- smaller than anticipated -- reached Hawaii near mid-day, but there were no immediate reports of significant damage and by early afternoon the National Weather's Service's Pacific Tsunami Center lifted the warning.

Speaking earlier in Washington, the president said tsunami warnings had been issued in the at-risk regions "and people have been alerted to evacuate coastal areas." Citizens on the West Coast should also be prepared for the possibility of "dangerous waves and currents throughout the day," he said.

Obama said "early indications are that hundreds of lives have been lost in Chile, and the damage is severe. On behalf of the American people Michelle and I send our deepest condolences to the Chilean people."

The White House said Obama spoke with Chilean President Michelle Bachelet Saturday afternoon and told her "the United States stands ready to assist the Chilean government's rescue and recovery efforts." Earlier, Obama led a conference call with his cabinet and White House staff to get an update on the destruction in Chile and the subsequent tsunami warning in the Pacific.

Officials in Chile reported that 214 had perished, but communications were spotty near the center of the quake at Concepcion, the nation's second largest city, southwest of Santiago. Dozens of aftershocks were reported.

"Once again, we've been reminded of the awful devastation that can come at a moment's notice," Obama said in remarks at the White House Rose Garden, "We cannot control nature, but we can and must be prepared for disaster when it strikes. In the hours ahead, we'll continue to take every step possible to prepare our shores and protect our citizens. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said, "We are closely monitoring the situation, ... Our thoughts and prayers are with the people of Chile, and we stand ready to help in ths hour of need."

The U.S. Embassy in Santiago quickly set up a command center to "ensure the safety of affected American citizens," Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said. Clinton said she would leave for the region on Sunday and reiterated the president's promise of American support in the recovery. "Our hemisphere comes together in times of crisis, and we will stand side by side with the people of Chile in this emergency," she said in a statement. The State Department said it was ready to help "as rapidly and effectively as we can." The U.S. government activated a disaster response team and alerted two search and rescue teams, the Washington Post said.

Chile's President Bachelet declared a catastrophe in central Chile after the magnitude-8.8 quake, the Associated Press reported. The news agency quoted Bachelet as saying a huge wave swept into a populated area in the Robinson Crusoe Islands, 410 miles off the Chilean coast in the Pacific Ocean. Property damage was widespread, and Bachelet called for calm.

In Washington, a Department of Homeland Security official said FEMA was monitoring the quake and staying in touch with emergency workers in Hawaii where a tsunami warning was issued, the New York Times reported. Sirens wailed overnight and at daybreak alerting residents to check radio and television reports for guidance.

The AP said tsunami waves could crash on Asian, Australian and New Zealand shores within 24 hours of the quake.

Jenifer Rhoades, a spokeswoman for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), told CNN,"it is a serious situation. People in these areas need to move to higher ground and away from beaches."

An tsumani "advisory" -- a less severe notice than a warning -- was issued for the West Coast of the United States, meaning people should stay away from beaches, NOAA said.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Sentence of Dissident Aung San Suu Kyi Upheld in Junta-Ruled Myanmar

Tom Diemer — 2010-02-26T09:45:00+00:00

Filed under: Immigration, Trade, Foreign Policy, Obama Administration, National Security, Culture, International, Ethics

Myanmar opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi will apparently remain under house arrest for at least another year, her lawyer says, after the Supreme Court of the country also known as Burma turned down her latest appeal.

Suu Kyi, who has been held by the country's military junta for 14 years, was convicted last August of violating the terms of her previous detention by giving shelter to an American man who swam uninvited to her lakeside home.

Her defense lawyer, Nyan Win, said he would make one more "special appeal" to Myanmar's Supreme Court, the Washington Post reported.

"Although the decision comes as no surprise, it is deeply disappointing," said British Ambassador Andrew Heyn, who attended the court proceeding with American, French and Australian diplomats. "We continue to believe that [Suu Kyi] should be released immediately along with the other 2,000 and more . . . prisoners of conscience."

Suu Kyi's political party, the National League for Democracy, won elections in the Southeast Asian country in 1990, but the military would not give up power. The junta has said it will hold elections later this year, but Suu Kyi would likely still be in detention and unable to take part.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Sen. Graham, White House Talks on Gitmo Worrying Some Republicans

Tom Diemer — 2010-02-25T16:30:00+00:00

Filed under: Senate, House, Barack Obama, John McCain, Iraq, Crime, Terror, Foreign Policy, Obama Administration, National Security, International, Afghanistan, Congress, Conservatives, Rahm Emanuel, Yemen

Sen. Lindsey Graham's private conversations with the Obama administration on closing the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, are making some of Graham's fellow Republicans nervous.

Graham (R-S.C.) has been involved in meetings and phone calls with White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel over the past several weeks discussing his conditions for supporting a shutdown of the prison, the Hill newspaper reported Thursday. Graham wants assurances that it would not hurt national security, and he favors setting up a new national security court where most of the remaining detainees could be tried.

But Michigan Rep. Peter Hoekstra, the senior Republican on the House intelligence committee, said Graham should leave a central issue in any shutdown -- where the prisoners would be moved -- to state and local authorities with jurisdiction over the facilities seen as potential sites. "I think it is crazy to be negotiating with the White House on this," Hoesktra said. Graham, he added, didn't want Gitmo detainees in South Carolina when such a move was considered.

Rep. Don Manzullo, a Republican representing a district that includes a prison in Thomson, Ill. -- one possible relocation facility -- said he hoped Graham "would talk to me first" if he is involved in any talks about moving terror suspects to Illinois.

Graham, architect of legislation creating military commissions and an advocate of prosecuting accused terrorists in miiltary courts, is expected to meet with Manzullo this week, Graham spokesman Kevin Bishop said.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Lawmaker Wants to Limit CIA's Moonlighting Agents

Tom Diemer — 2010-02-24T13:01:00+00:00

Filed under: House, Democrats, Iraq, Iran, Terror, Foreign Policy, Obama Administration, National Security, Culture, Afghanistan, Congress, Nuclear Proliferation, Ethics, Yemen, Law

A California lawmaker, skeptical of CIA scrutiny of its moonlighting agents, wants to crack down on active-duty intelligence officers who take part-time jobs in the private sector.

Politico said Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) intends to add an amendment to the Intelligence Reauthorization bill that would require the Director of National Intelligence and the Office of Government Ethics to issue regulations barring agents from taking second jobs if they create "a conflict of interest or appearance thereof." The intel director would also have to annually disclose all moonlighting arrangements to Congress' intelligence committees.

Earlier this month, Politico reported on the little-known CIA policy of permitting agents to take on part-time work as long as their supervisors approve and are satisfied no conflict exists.

Eshoo said she sensed that the current policy amounted to a "rubber-stamp deal" and that "no one's really looking at it or keeping a close eye on it."

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

U.S. to Cut Back on Night Raids in Afghanistan

Tom Diemer — 2010-02-24T12:15:00+00:00

Filed under: Terror, Foreign Policy, Obama Administration, International, Afghanistan, Ethics, al Qaeda

In an effort to ease tensions between U.S.-led military forces and Afghan civilians, coalition commanders have decided to restrict risky nighttime raids on private homes and compounds in Afghanistan, a senior U.S. official has told CNN.

The directive is in a classified document signed by Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top NATO commander in Afghanistan, according to the unidentified official who saw it.

Nighttime raids -- aimed at rooting out terrorists and finding weaponry -- can turn violent and have caused problems for U.S. and NATO forces that enter homes in what's understandably seen by Afghans as an affront and an invasion of privacy.

The new directive urges use of Afghan troops when possible to knock on doors before going into homes at night. It says troops should conduct analyses of whether night raids are essential or could be put off until daybreak, CNN said.

Earlier this week, McChrystal released a video apology after an incident in which 27 Afghan civilians were killed in an airstrike. "I have made it clear to our forces that we are here to protect the Afghan people," he said. "I pledge to strengthen our efforts to regain your trust to build a brighter future for all Afghans."

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Generals Wary of Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal; Navy to Let Women Serve on Subs

Tom Diemer — 2010-02-24T08:58:00+00:00

Filed under: Hillary Clinton, Senate, Democrats, Republicans, Barack Obama, John McCain, Iraq, Education, Gay Rights, Bill Clinton, Foreign Policy, National Security, Culture, Ethics

Two top Army and Air Force generals remain deeply concerned about the prospect of gays serving openly in the Armed Forces and the abandonment of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

With their public comments, Army Chief of Staff Gen. George W. Casey Jr. and Gen. Norton A. Schwartz, his counterpart in the Air Force, may be giving political cover to balky lawmakers who oppose President Obama's call for repeal of the existing policy, which requires gays in the military to keep their sexual orientation private, The New York Times reported.

"I do have serious concerns about the impact of repeal of the law on a force that's fully engaged in two wars and has been at war for eight-and-a-half years," Casey said before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday. "We just don't know the impacts on readiness and military effectiveness."

Schwartz, in a separate appearance before the committee, said little research existed to show how the policy shift might affect deployed personnel, surveillance and support missions.

Both military men, however, pledged that they would fully carry out whatever decision Congress makes on the question of gay men and lesbians serving in the military. President Obama and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen have called for doing away with "don't ask, don't tell" and permitting gays to serve openly. The policy was put in place in the early 1990s under former President Bill Clinton.

In a separate development at the Pentagon, the Defense Department notified Congress that the Navy had decided to lift its ban on women sailors serving aboard submarines, the Associated Press reported. Congress has 30 days to respond to the change. Young women graduating from the Naval Academy this year could be among the first to serve.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments