Friday, December 15, 2006

New Jersey gets civil unions & I'm happy in a sad kind of way

By Diane Silver

The good news this week is that the New Jersey legislature has approved the creation of civil unions and the governor has said he will sign the bill. The bad news is that they approved civil unions and that, yes, the governor will sign this into law.

This weeks' vote came after the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that to deny lesbian and gay couples marriage, or something like it, is unconstitutional.

The very good news for New Jersey families headed by same-sex couples is that they will finally get approximately the same legal rights that heterosexuals take for granted. The Washington Post reports:
Among the benefits gay couples would get under New Jersey's civil unions bill are adoption rights, hospital visitation rights and inheritance rights.
This is why I'm jumping for joy for NJ families today. For too long our families have struggled under an unfair legal system that targets our children (no inheritance from one parent, the chance of being torn away from a loving co-parent if the biological parent dies) and ourselves (banned from the hospital room of a dying spouse).

Gaining these rights is far too important to quibble about whether our loving families are joined in unions or marriage.

But I have to admit to also being saddened by this news because what you call something matters. Committed same-sex couples are not just life partners, and they're certainly not unionized. They are, in fact, spouses. They are married.

The laws will not be fair until our relationships are acknowledged as marriage. The time to end our second-class citizenship is long past.

Happy Bill of Rights Day

By Diane Silver

I have to run off to get to work in a minute, so there's not much time to ponder the importance of the 215th anniversary of the Bill of Rights. However, I did want to take a second to put up a link to that important document and to remind readers why the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution are such a key part of our society.

I think they are at the core of the American Dream. To me that dream has never been about becoming rich as much as it has been about freedom -- the freedom to simply be who you are and to pursue your dreams. The Bill of Rights preserves that freedom. Thanks, founders, for giving us that gift.

Thursday, December 14, 2006

Housekeeping: You must now register to comment on In This Moment

By Diane Silver

I want to continue the lively debate on this blog, and I do value hearing from all of you. Gosh in the last few months, I've made some great contacts through this In This Moment.

However, I also believe that people should show at least a tiny bit of backbone and stand up for their opinions. Otherwise you get folks posting things like the first comment in this discussion of Kansas politics. The issue isn't hurt feelings, certainly not on my part, but I do believe that people should be accountable for their opinions.

Thus, the new rule of the game at In This Moment is that people must first register with Blogger in order to post a comment. Of course, you can all reach me directly with comments, news tips and blasts of indignation at my Hope & Politics address.

We'll see how this goes for a while. I hope you're all (yes, even the folks I disagree with) having a great holiday season.

Housekeeping: Here's a question for you all

By Diane Silver

The brave anonymous has noted that as blog proprietor I can change the settings to only allow registered users to post. Even though I think anonymous' question was irrelevant to the discussion, he/she/it accidentally hit on a valid question: Should I require people to take at least some form of identity before they post comments?

What do you think?

By the way, ole' anonymous was actually attempting to avoid answering the very reasonable question Nancy Jane Moore put to him. Her question to he/she/it was:
And I must ask: why are you so afraid to use your name when you make comments? You know who we are -- why not use your name?

Anonymous answered at the end of a long comment:
This is your blog and you set it up to allow anonymous comments. If you don't like anonymous comments, you can fix that in just a few seconds.

My note to anonymous is: While you've got me thinking and asking folks about the issue of how comments are posted on this blog, you didn't answer Nancy's question. Let me re-phrase it for her. What do you have to hide? Why are you so afraid to be honest?

Wednesday, December 13, 2006

Kansas: Voting for Phill Kline for DA would have been "unconscionable"

By Diane Silver

Now it's time to hear from the other side of the Johnson County Republican Committee. Let's listen to why one Republican precinct representative - Kansas House Rep. Stephanie Sharp -- voted against making Phill Kline the district attorney.

By the way, note that she fears retaliation for standing by the voters of her precinct. Those voters overwhelmingly rejected Kline when he ran for re-election as attorney general in November.

Sharp writes in an email to interested voters:

For the record: Even though this was a secret ballot, I don't hide my votes from you. I approached the evening, and my vote, scientifically.

I researched the vote totals in every one of my precincts, including my own. Phill Kline lost every precinct and nearly all by a 2-to-1 margin. In my precinct (Lenexa 3-7), the total was 462-205.

In every precinct, that race received the highest total votes, which signaled to me that voters were very adamant about voting in that race, even when they skipped other races. Thus, my vote went to Steve Howe. (Kline's only opponent in the race.)

I'm sure I will face retaliation by many fellow Republicans, but considering the above facts, any other vote would have been unconscionable.

I've heard from many of you upset about this outcome. I understand your frustration with the precinct process and am hopeful this event will encourage primary election participation.

Sharp argues that the outcome of Monday night's vote shows why it's important for voters to get involved in electing their precinct representatives.

Political boundaries are arranged by precincts of voters. Each precinct is represented by a Republican Precinct Committeewoman and Committeeman, and a Democrat Precinct Committeewoman and Committeeman. These people are elected during the August primary. Maybe this will bring attention to the importance of primary elections in Kansas!

...The point the media is missing: Precinct Committee representatives serve as your voice when a vacancy occurs. Just how I am your voice in Topeka, these folks are accountable to you, the voters.

Sharp urges Johnson County Republicans to find out who represents them on the precinct level and get involved. To find your precinct representative either take a look at your voter registration card, or visit the following web sites.
Lenexa Republican Precinct Committee.

Shawnee Republican Precinct Committee

Kansas: Phill Kline's election as Johnson County DA "insults" democracy & voters

By Diane Silver

Are people angry in Johnson County about deposed Attorney General Phill Kline's election to be their district attorney? Oh yeah.

Boo Tyson, executive director of the the Johnson County MAINstream Coalition, explains how her organization feels about Kline being put into office by the votes of 316 ultra-conservative GOP activists.

In a statement, released Wednesday afternoon, Tyson notes:

The MAINstream Coalition is disappointed in and shocked by the vote of the Johnson County Republican Party precinct committee leaders to elect Phill Kline as the new County District Attorney. This decision ignored the will of the moderate voters of Johnson County, who sent an overwhelming message to Kline on November 7th. It is just one more example of the radical right's willingness to ignore the perspectives of anyone who disagrees with them, even if they are members of their own party. As we have seen on a national level, this kind of "stay the course" thinking is both short-sighted and disrespectful.

Mr. Kline was also never officially announced as a candidate prior to this election. While there were rumors of his candidacy, the lack of a formal announcement is yet another reflection of an obvious lack of regard for the electoral process. One of the reasons the MAINstream Coalition was founded was to oppose "stealth candidates" who attempt to fool the electorate. In this case, Mr. Kline apparently wanted to fool his own party members.

The MAINstream Coalition welcomes voters-and potential voters-of any political party or affiliation to join us in our nonpartisan, moderate approach to stand against the "blinders on" approach used so often by the Far Right. We continue to work to protect and defend religious liberty and public education-fighting for democracy and freedom. While this vote may have been legal, it does nothing to promote democracy or honor voters. In fact, it insults both.

A nonpartisan, grassroots organization, the coalition reports that it was founded in Johnson County in 1993 to fight extremist attempts to undermine Constitutional freedoms and the separation of church and state.

In This Moment explains how Kansas' recently ousted attorney general became the new DA of the state's most populous county.

Tuesday, December 12, 2006

Kansas: Republicans "stuck a finger in the eye of Johnson County"

By Diane Silver

To be precise, 316 ultra-conservative Republicans stuck their fingers in the eyes of 65 percent of Johnson County voters when they elected ousted Attorney General Phill Kline as the county's new district attorney.

Last night's vote by the county Republican committee sets up newly minted Democrat Paul Morrison and Kline to swap jobs. The current Johnson County district attorney, Morrison beat Kline in a landslide in November to win the office of attorney general. In Johnson County, Kansas' most populous county, 65 percent voted to boot Kline from office.

To gage the depth of the anger, even among Republicans, please note that the finger-in-the-eye quote doesn't come from me, but from Andy Wollen. AP reports:
Andy Wollen, chairman of the moderate Kansas Traditional Republican Majority, said GOP conservatives had "stuck a finger in the eye of Johnson County voters."

"The voters sent a clear message to Phill Kline -- 'you're fired,'" Wollen said after Monday night's balloting.
Taking the issue of abortion and the culture war out of the discussion for the moment, Kline's victory is a clear sign that Kansas needs to change the way it fills open seats. Instead of allowing a party committee to fill the seat, isn't it time to bring a little democracy to the situation and begin holding special elections?

There are some jobs in government that, honestly, don't make much difference in people's lives. If you don't believe that, think about the last time you knew of a lieutenant governor who had an impact on your life.

But being a county district attorney isn't one of those. DAs are an important part of the law enforcement team. To put someone with no experience as a prosecutor and little to no experience in criminal law in that prosition is ridiculous.

AP reports the Kline will probably bring his team from the attorney general office with him. That means displacing the proven professionals Morrison has put in place. That can't be a good sign for the county.

AP also gives us an interesting quote from Morrison. It shows that the state's new attorney general understands something Kline may never get: Some things are beyond politics.
Morrison said he was "deeply disappointed" by the vote. But he pledged a smooth transition for Kline into the county office, saying, "public safety should be above politics."
The Kansas City Star has a good look at the vote and the politics of it.

Civil Rights, Civil Unions, Religion and the State from an Muslim Activist's Eyes

By Pamela K. Taylor

I want to point readers to an article written by a Muslim activist who was in Wisconsin recently canvassing against that state's ammendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman, and denying legal status to civil unions and common law marriages.

The amendment to the state constitution reads:
That marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state and that a legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state.

The article is a beautiful explanation of how civil rights must be applied across the board, and how the encroachment of religious traditions into politics must be challenged. It's a sincere and heartfelt demonstration of how an individual can support another human being's right to self-determination in every matter, including marriage, even though that individual believes his religion prohibits same-sex and common law marriages.

To me, it is clear that all human beings should have the right to make their own moral decisions, that freedom of religion should apply even to those whose religious choices you don't agree with.


Of course, the matter is complicated because religious freedom is not absolute. It is tempered by other freedoms and social needs. A society's need for security may justify laws which require those who veil their faces to reveal their identity under certain circumstances. Similarly, religious traditions which inflict bodily harm on their participants (say suicide cults or practices such as fgm) may be outlawed by society.

But in instances where no one is being physically harmed, and security is not endangered, then we have no moral authority to insist that any one religious interpretation can be imposed upon the entirety of society.

Monday, December 11, 2006

Kansas: It's official. Johnson County GOP picks Phill Kline as district attorney

By Diane Silver

This is bizarre, insane and probably the best political present Johnson County Democrats could ever get.

The suburban Kansas City Republican committee has just chosen the recently ousted Kansas attorney general, Phill Kline, to replace the man who creamed him at the polls on Nov. 7. It is true: Kline will take over for Democrat Paul Morrison as the county district attorney.

This is despite the fact that Kline has little to no experience as a prosecutor or in criminal law. Kline will serve out the last two years of Morrison's term as DA, while Morrison takes over as the attorney general of the state. Morrison was elected DA as a Republican and later switched to the Democratic Party to run against Kline.

In the vote that was just completed, Kline "beat the other nominee Steve Howe by 21 votes," KC's Channel 9 TV reports. Kline was put into office by anti-abortion crusaders and the ultra-conservative wing of the county party. The vote was even held at the Westside Family Church.

To show how out of touch the conservatives are in Johnson County, in the race for attorney general, Kline could only dredge up 35 percent of the vote in the county where he will now act as district attorney.

It will be fascinating to see what the voters of Johnson County make of all this. It will be fascinating to see if Kline has even a whisper of a chance of winning the DA's office when he comes up for election in 2008.

Memo to Bush: You're no Harry Truman

By Nancy Jane Moore

It seems that Bush is still planning to "stay the course" in Iraq, despite the findings of the Iraq Study Group.

According to a report from the McClatchy newspapers Washington bureau, Bush has taken to comparing himself to Harry Truman, who was unpopular when he left office but later won praise for his job as president.

However, I suspect it was Truman's basic integrity -- not his handling of the Korean War -- that brought about his rehabilitation. Bush doesn't have integrity to fall back on.

History is not going to be kind to a president who used the excuse of an attack on the United States to start an unnecessary war against a country that wasn't involved. Not only has the U.S. invasion left Iraq in shambles, it has diverted our military from actions that would make our country safer and left us unable to respond effectively to other threats.

The McClatchy article also notes that members of Congress are frustrated with Bush's refusal to face reality on Iraq. It quotes incoming Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on Bush:

He is tepid in what he talks about doing. Someone has to get the message to this man that there have to be significant changes.

Over on Balkinization, Marty Lederman has a great response to Reid:

Someone? How about Congress "getting him the message," Senator Reid, by actually requiring him to act?

Lederman suggests that Congress could put some of the Iraq Study Group recommendations into a bill and pass it. Even if Bush vetoes it, and even if Congress doesn't have the votes to override the veto, the issue would be on the table.

Some of the comments to Lederman's post suggest that Congress go for a resolution -- since a resolution can't be vetoed -- showing no confidence in the president because of his Iraq policy.

This idea has lots of merit. It's way past time that Congress asserted itself. If we're going to restore our democracy and improve our relationship with the rest of the world, Congress has to act. Bush is going to "stay the course" no matter how much of our country he destroys in the process.

Friday, December 08, 2006

Watching the zoo surrounding Mary Cheney's pregnancy & (gulp) praising the vice president

By Diane Silver

Hell must have frozen over because I'm going to do something I never thought possible: I'm going to praise Vice President Dick Cheney.

In fact, I come to sing the praises of both Dick and Lynne Cheney who have publicly reacted to the news of their daughter Mary's pregnancy exactly as proud grandparents should. The issue, of course, is that Mary is that most horrible of beast, an "out lesbian."

As the Los Angeles Times reported:
The vice president and his wife issued a statement saying they are "looking forward with eager anticipation to the arrival of their sixth grandchild."
It seems bizarre to make such a big deal about grandparents being proud of the impending birth of a grandchild, but such is the reality of life for families headed by same-sex couples. No matter how committed we are to each other, how good we are as parents, we are always attacked. Yes, it IS news when the very conservative vice president does nothing more than say he is proud that a baby will be born to his out-lesbian daughter.

Meanwhile, the media and blogosphere zoo has been clamoring for attention. The Post's Media Notes has a good rundown of the coverage and the blogging.

Best of all, though, Washington Post writer Ruth Marcus has a wonderful column in Friday's paper focusing on real family values and what she very accurately calls the "benign reality of gay families today." Marcus writes:
To be a badly wanted child (one thing that's indisputable about the children of same-sex couples: the parents had to work to make it happen) in a home with two loving parents is no tragedy. If they're worried about "emotional devastation," the (disapproving writers) Crouses and Knights of the world would do better to reserve their lamentations for children in poverty, those who are abused or neglected, or for children in families splintered by divorce.
Well said! Congratulations to Mary and her partner Heather Poe, who have been married in every way except in the eyes of the law for 15 years.

Kansas House Republicans: Electing the old white guy's team

By Diane Silver

I have been around Kansas politics far too long. I can't believe that I missed the fact that the entire leadership team recently elected by Kansas House Republicans is all-male and all-white. And just in case a little diversity might have crept in, House Republicans also made certain that their leaders were all-rural and all 60 or older.

I did notice the conservative slant, but didn't even think about the bland sameness of it all until the Lawrence Journal World pointed it out and noted that Kansas Democrats were "snickering at the makeup of the House Republican leadership team."

I missed the significance because, well, it's not exactly a new thing for the Republicans leading the House to be all white and all male. However, when I was covering the Legislature I don't remember them all being so close to cashing in their Social Security.

By the way, the GOP members of the Kansas House include females as well as males. I haven't looked up the ages, but I'd be willing to bet the voters let a few young folk take the oath of office. Does anyone know if there are any black Republicans among the group?

The Journal-World notes:
The GOP leadership team includes Speaker Melvin Neufeld, 66, a farmer from Ingalls; Majority Leader Ray Merrick, 67, a business owner from Stilwell; Speaker Pro Tem Don Dahl, 61, retired of the Navy from Hillsboro; and caucus chairman Dick Kelsey, 60, of Goddard. The two youngest members of the team are Majority Whip Rob Olson, 37, of Olathe, and assistant Majority Leader Jene Vickrey, 47, of Louisburg.

Those candidates were elected by the 78-member House Republican caucus Monday. The only woman to run for a leadership job was Lana Gordon, of Topeka, and she was defeated by Vickrey, 59-18, with one not voting....

Meanwhile, the 47-member House Democratic caucus returned all of its previous leaders, which includes three men and two women, and one of those women, Lawrence Democrat Barbara Ballard, is black. In addition, a new member of the House Democratic leadership team is Paul Davis, of Lawrence, who was elected unopposed as policy chairman to replace Nancy Kirk, who retired from the Legislature. Geographically, the Democratic leaders hail from Greensburg, Wichita, Hays, Lawrence and Leavenworth.

Thursday, December 07, 2006

The Baker-Hamilton Panel on Iraq tells us the obvious about the need to change course

By Pamela K. Taylor

Today's headlines:
Panel: Bush's Iraq policies have failed
Gates says U.S. isn't winning Iraq war
Panel Urges Basic Shift in U.S. Policy in Iraq

As much "I told you so's" are not useful, this is really a "haven't we been saying this for months" moment.

The fact of the matter is, having made a huge mess in a country we should have left alone in the first place, we are now stuck. If we pull out, Iraq seems sure to descend into a really nasty civil war, and will likely emerge with an Islamist regime along the lines of its neighbor, Iran. If we stay, we get dragged into the really nasty civil war, lose a lot more American lives, and are unable to prevent that Islamist regime from coming into power. Either way, it seems pretty much inevitable that large numbers of Iraqis are going to lose their lives along the way, and the eventual government of Iraq is going to hold substantial grudges against the US.

So what can we do?

It's pretty clear to me that the longer we stay, the worse it is going to be. Violence against people perceived as collaborators is at an all time high. That's what much of reported sectarian violence is about. It's more the people cooperating with the US vs the people resisting what they perceive as an occupation than it is sunni vs shi'a simply because they are sunni and shi'a. Pre-existing political tensions between the former ruling Sunni minority and the Shia majority, as well as religious differences only exacerbate the situation, but the underlying cause is the continued presence of American combat troops in Iraq and divisions between Iraqis as to what to do about it -- go along with American plans as nicely as possible so we will leave sooner, or try to force us out.

The longer we stay, the greater the military attempts to get us to leave, and to pressure our collaborators, will become. If we leave in three years, it will be worse than if we leave in two years. If we leave in two years, it will be worse than if we leave in one. The sooner we can begin to withdraw, the sooner Iraq can begin to heal.

It is probably not a good idea to simply leave a vacuum. The Arab states, or the UN should send peacekeeping forces to the country in an attempt to minimize the bloodshed, but what really needs to happen is something along the lines of Truth and Reconcilliation a la South Africa.

Iraq has lived for decades under a ruthless military dictator and the wounds from that time are still festering. Two wars with America and one occupation later, and the wounds are becoming life-threatening. Only by a national reconciliation process will the country be able to heal and put the past behind it. Otherwise, simmering tensions will surely erupt in ten, twenty, thirty years as they did in the former Yugoslavia.

As much as I think the US ought to make feasible this sort of effort with monetary contributions, I also think that we need to stay out of the process. It must be 100% genuine and 100% Iraqi, with no possibility of a perception of outside interference.

As we withdraw and after we have withdrawn, we need to make reparations to the Iraqi people. I'm not talking throwing some money at American contractors... money that never gets translated into projects that improve the quality of life for Iraqi people. I mean rebuilding the country's infrastructure, building hospitals, universites, factories, providing scholarships for Iraqis who want to study in American universities, especially Iraqis who want to study medicine, engineering, chemistry, business administration, etc.

We owe Iraq a lot after supporting Hussein, the first Iraq war, ten years of sanctions, and the second Iraq war. Having devastated their country, it is our responsibility to rebuild it. And rather than trying to dominate whatever new government emerges in Iraq with force and military threats, we should win their trust with generosity.

And we shouldn't expect to be met with smiling faces, rather we can expect to be greeted with suspicion and mistrust for many, many years to come. The Iraqis aren't going to forget what we did to them any more than the Iranians forget the Mossadegh and the Shah. Americans may not remember that the Iranian Revolution was a direct result of us toppling the democratically elected Mossadegh and supporting the Shah with his notorious secret police, the Savik, but the Iranians surely so.

So too, we can expect the Iraqis to hold long grudges that we supported Saddam Hussein when he was gassing his own people, and sending political enemies to be tortured. We can expect them to remember that we invaded their country on false pretenses. If we take the steps to atone for our treatment of their country, they and other people's who rightfully view the US as a self-interested bully, will slowly rediscover respect for us.

There is an awful lot that is good about America -- from our Constitution with its freedoms, particuarly freedom of speech and religion, to an insistence on due process in the courts and checks and balances in federal and states governments, and a individualism that has historically resulted in the most class fluid society in the world.

But that beauty and moral high ground has been crowded out by our unconscionable foreign policy since WWII, both in countering the spread of communism and in ensuring access to the world's oil reserves and other natural resources.

I know the deplorable conditions in many countries with rich natural resources cannot be laid solely at the feet of multi-national corporations and the countries that back them up -- indigenous mismanagement and corruption has played a vital role. And I know that people will say that only developed nations had the expertise, wealth, and technology to be able to develop those resources, which may well be true.

But it remains the case that we have developed natural resources without at the same time developing the countries where those natural resources are located, we have protected our own access and ability to continue developing those resources at the cost of human dignity and at the price of huge amounts of human sufferring.

It would have been better to help those countries build the infrastructure, manufacturing base, techonology sector, etc, to use their own resources themselves. Would we have been less wealthy -- in terms of dollars? Yes. In terms of our contribution to human welfare? No. In terms of friends and allies? Definately not.

Our foreign policy has concentrated on material wealth over human dignity and the importance of building allies through generosity for too long. Iraq would be a good place to start changing course.

Wednesday, December 06, 2006

Iraq Study Group: Looming "catastrophe" & a war already lost

By Diane Silver

What a horrible, bloody mess Iraq has become, and the Iraq Study Group is confirming that fact.

The group has just presented its report to our not-so-beloved president, and first looks at it are available at The Washington Post and New York Times. The Times has a chart comparing options. Both have links to the report itself, which talks about a looming humanitarian catastrophe if the United States doesn't change course.

(Note that The Post has just taken the word "catastrophe" out of its story and headline. That may show that Post editors think that was inaccurate or that they're backing off from strong criticism of President Bush. I haven't had a chance to read the report yet, but I'm going to leave the word in my coverage for the moment because it does seem to convey the situation. However, read that word with caution until either you or I have time to review the report.)

Earlier today The Post reported on some of the background to the report. The emphasis is mine.


Although the study group will present its plan as a much-needed course change in Iraq, many of its own advisers concluded during its deliberations that the war is essentially already lost, according to private correspondence obtained yesterday and interviews with participants. The best the commission could put forward would be the "least bad" of many bad options, as former ambassador Daniel C. Kurtzer wrote.

An early working draft from July stated that "there is even doubt that any level of resources could achieve the administration's stated goals, given the illiberal and undemocratic political forces, many of them Islamic fundamentalists, that will dominate large parts of the country for a long time."

The vice president's lesbian daughter is pregnant

By Diane Silver

This should be interesting for the Religious Right. I can't wait to hear the debate about this: Mary Cheney is pregnant.

The Washington Post reports:
She and her partner of 15 years, Heather Poe, are "ecstatic" about the baby, due in late spring, said a source close to the couple.
John at AMERICAblog has some discussion and links about new Virginia laws, which will make life particularly difficult for Mary, Heather and their new baby. The family (and yes, they are a family) lives in Virginia.

Best wishes to Mary and Heather.

Liberals read science fiction

Neural Gourmet, a "community of ideas and ideals," has selected one of our posts here on In This Moment for the First Anniversary Edition of Carnival of the Liberals. The post is "Do you read science fiction," by Nancy Jane Moore from May 25, 2006.

And while you're reading, go check out the other interesting posts that Neural Gourmet selected. This carnival was a roundup of the best posts of the year, so there are some fascinating essays here. It's a great place to find new reading material.

Tuesday, December 05, 2006

Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius gets a high profile job & more talk of higher office

By Diane Silver

Could a Kansas governor ever become president? No one knows the answer to that question, but we may find out someday if Gov. Kathleen Sebelius' political fortunes continue to rise.

That thought comes along with word that Sebelius will take over as chair of the Democratic Governors Association next year. The job is considered one way for a governor to raise her or his profile nationally.

Sebelius is succeeding New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, who has been frequently mentioned as a possible presidential candidate.

AP notes:

Sebelius has enjoyed a relatively high profile despite her state's second - tier standing in presidential politics and her relatively new status. As a Democrat leading a traditionally Republican state, she used her identity as a political moderate, her status as a farm-state governor and her gender to create political currency.

She reportedly was on Sen. John Kerry's short list of vice presidential candidates in 2004 despite her professed lack of interest.

The next few years should be interesting.

Not a joke & not science fiction: New device disperses crowds by making people feel like their skin is on fire

By Diane Silver

Wired News has turned up something that makes your skin crawl, literally. What's worrying about their report is that they say this new device has just been certified for use in Iraq.

Wired News reports on the device this way.
The crowd is getting ugly. Soldiers roll up in a Hummer. Suddenly, the whole right half of your body is screaming in agony. You feel like you've been dipped in molten lava. You almost faint from shock and pain, but instead you stumble backwards -- and then start running. To your surprise, everyone else is running too. In a few seconds, the street is completely empty.

You've just been hit with a new nonlethal weapon that has been certified for use in Iraq -- even though critics argue there may be unforeseen effects....

The Air Force's Active Denial System, or ADS, has been certified safe after lengthy tests by military scientists in the lab and in war games.
While an effective nonlethal device for dispersing crowds may be a good idea, just the mention of this thing has me worried.

If it works like Wired News reports, doesn't the fact that it inflicts so much pain (even if it doesn't maim or kill) mean that using it is torture? Could this device be used on prisoners to torture them? Would unpopular administrations be tempted to use it to disperse lawful demonstrations in the United States?

The mainstream media seems to have missed this story completely, but if it is true, we need to look at this device closely and consider the implications. Wired News has also posted documents about the Air Force tests on the device.

The Kansas House ignores moderates & turns hard right

By Diane Silver

[updated 5:45 pm]

Well, this is interesting. Republicans in the Kansas House of Representatives have just thumbed their collective noses at voters by electing arch-conservative Melvin Neufeld as speaker.

Neufeld, a farmer from western Kansas and the current chair of the House Appropriations Committee, is a longtime member of the farthest right wing of the Kansas Legislature. His election yesterday to the 2nd most powerful post in state government is a bad sign for the forces of moderation. It took two ballots for the majority Republican caucus to elect Neufeld, but in the end he won.

I remember Neufeld well from my work as a reporter in the Statehouse. At that time, he was a friendly but powerless back-bencher known to all as simply "Melvin." My most vivid memory of him involved a speech he gave pushing an anti-abortion proposal.

As he stood speaking on the floor of the House, the chamber emptied, particularly of what was then the moderate Republican leadership of the House. They all went back to the then-speaker's office behind the podium and laughed at him. I know this happened because I was standing in their midst at the time.

I guess Neufeld gets the last laugh now. The question, though, is what will he do with his new power?

Will he have grown from the inconsequential person I knew more than a decade ago? Will he have matured beyond the soul who was once accused of trying to blackmail another lawmaker into voting his way? Will he remember that as speaker his job involves the whole state and not just those few who share his beliefs?

The fact that conservatives took over all the majority Republican leadership posts in the House is frightening and frustrating. It's as if the people under the Statehouse dome didn't hear, or perhaps even notice, what the voters did on Nov. 7.

The Kansas City Star provides more detailed coverage of Neufeld's elevation to power. The Lawrence Journal-World has the most complete and interesting story on the speaker's election.

UPDATE: Hat tip to Thoughts From Kansas for providing a link to Kansas RINO's post and details on the Kansas Supreme Court decision involving the blackmail allegations. The decision gives blow-by-blow detail of the accusations against Neufeld.

Monday, December 04, 2006

Maryland Court of Appeals hears argument on gay marriage


The Maryland Court of Appeals will hear argument today, December 4, at 10 A.M. E.S.T. on whether state law prohibits gay marriage.

The argument will be carried live on the Web. The court website warns that the live webcast of the argument is part of a pilot project and may suffer glitches.

The case is Conway v. Deane, No. 44 September term 2006. Briefs in the case are available here.

The plaintiffs are gay and lesbian couples who sued county officials who refused to give them marriage licenses. Maryland passed a law back in 1973 declaring marriage as between one man and one woman. In recent years, though, Maryland has also passed laws prohibiting discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation. The plaintiffs are arguing that the law is unconstitutional under the state constitution.

A trial court in Baltimore ruled for the plaintiffs back in January, finding that the law was discriminatory. The Court of Appeals -- Maryland's highest court -- took a direct appeal from the county officials who were sued.

The Washington Post story gives the case a human feel by focusing on a 73-year-old former civil rights activist who is one of the plaintiffs along with his partner of 28 years.

I don't know enough about the Maryland Court of Appeals to call this case -- I don't follow their rulings closely enough to know anything about the justices. But I do recall being surprised by their rulings from time to time. My guess? Anything could happen.

Oh my! The rumors about Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline may well be true

by Diane Silver

It appears that our recently trounced Attorney General, Phill Kline, may seriously want to trade jobs with outgoing Johnson County District Attorney Paul Morrison. I half thought the rumors were a joke, but according to Kansas City Star political reporter Steve Kraske they're not.

Dec. 11 is the date set for the Johnson County GOP precinct members to vote on Morrison's replacement as district attorney.

How could Kline possibly take over the job of the Democrat who creamed him in the Nov. 7 election? I explain it all in a previous post.

I'm with Kraske on this one. As he notes in his column:
For now, though, the question is: What in the world is Kline thinking?
Morrison beat Kline by a landslide, 59 to 41 percent, last month. Kline served four terms as a member of the Kansas House representing Shawnee in Johnson County. They know him well there, and perhaps Kline should consider the fact that Morrison creamed him in Johnson County by a 65 to 35 percent vote.

Perhaps it's time for the one-time darling of the Religious Right to simply move on.

Friday, December 01, 2006

The Dixie Chicks aren't the only people who aren't "ready to make nice"

By Nancy Jane Moore

I must admit that I've been a bit unsure about Jim Webb, the senator-elect from Virginia whose narrow victory put the Democrats over the top. He is, after all, a former Republican.

But Webb did something this week that proves he is exactly the kind of senator the country really needs at a time like this: He refused to make nice with George Bush.

According to The Washington Post, Webb avoided the both the receiving line and individual photo op with the president at a reception for new members of Congress. However, Bush tracked him down and reportedly asked him "How's your boy?" (Unlike the children of most of the power elite in Washington, Webb's son is a Marine serving in Iraq.)

Webb replied that he'd like to bring all the troops home. Bush apparently said that wasn't what he asked, and Webb replied, "That's between me and my boy, Mr. President."

George Will was offended by this behavior, calling Webb a "boor." Will apparently believes that nothing is more important than the social politeness that is the rule for Washington insiders. You can savage each other in the press and on the talk shows, as long as you follow all the forms at social gatherings. And following the rules includes kowtowing to the president.

Maybe in most cases, with most presidents, that's the way it should be. But as one who has long argued that the Bush administration should not be seen as business as usual, but as a serious threat to our country and our democracy, I am glad to see someone in the Senate who is more interested in doing what's right -- and in speaking truth to power -- than in joining the club.

Furthermore, there was nothing polite about Bush's inquiry; he was trying to play his "compassionate" card by acting as if he really cared about Webb's son. If Webb had played along -- had pretended that the issue of his son's welfare has nothing to do with Bush's unnecessary war in Iraq -- he would have been agreeing to a polite subordinate role. People like Bush can always use that.

Webb told The Post:
I'm not particularly interested in having a picture of me and George W. Bush on my wall.
He added that he meant "[n]o offense to the institution of the presidency," but pointed out that "leaders do some symbolic things to try to convey who they are and what the message is."

I'm not sure whether Webb meant to imply that he took the stand he did because he's a leader, or that Bush was attempting, by use of the symbolic act of asking after Webb's son, to convey a message. But it works either way.

I think Jim Webb is going to be a breath of fresh air in the Senate. He's clearly "not ready to make nice."

Thursday, November 30, 2006

17 states report voting problems, including machines that flipped votes


By Diane Silver

Earlier this week we reported that voting problems in Florida may well have sent the wrong person to Congress. (No surprise. It was the Republican). Today we take note of a new study reporting that at least 17 states suffered major voting problems.

Hat tip to Pew's Stateline.org for pointing out the report by electionline.org. However, I'd like to quibble with Pew's lead. Pew notes that "voting in the 2006 midterm elections went relatively smoothly nationwide."

That would be an accurate statement if you were expecting bumpiness to look like the 2000 presidential election or to end with blood on the streets. Read what Pew says further down in the story.
The nonpartisan research group that tracks states' voting procedures found that long lines, machine malfunctions and human error resulted in people choosing not to vote, or votes being counted incorrectly nationwide. On top of that, voter fraud and intimidation and the occasional freak occurrence -- including bomb threats and invasive squirrels -- stymied voters.
How can any of that be seen as "smooth," or even democratic?

Nearly every state encountered some kind of hurdle, the report said. Some snafus remained under the radar, especially in races where margins were not very close. But in tight contests, these irregularities took center stage.
The electionline report also discovered a problem that should send us all out into the streets to march.
Machine malfunctions caused by computer and human error turned up in many states. The most frequent problem was vote flipping, when voters chose one candidate only to have the machine mark another. This happened in at least a dozen states, including Florida, Illinois, Ohio and Texas.
Take a look at the full 32-page report on this election's "bumps."

How about some real election reform?

Wednesday, November 29, 2006

Kansas Wednesday: Phill Kline hints & the Johnson County GOP almost feel the love

By Diane Silver

Are the folks in Johnson County shivering because of the sudden winter storm, or are they quaking because Attorney General Phill Kline could become their new district attorney?

Such a wild event may come to pass. Kline is indicating that he may be "open" to the idea of taking the soon-to-be vacated position of Johnson County DA. The position is open because current DA and newly minted Democrat, Paul Morrison, booted Kline from the AG's office in the Nov. 7 election.

Because Morrison won his previous DA post as a Republican, the choice of Morrison's successor has landed in the ample laps of the county Republican committee.

The Kansas City Star's KC Buzz Blog is reporting that Kline's spokeswoman says the AG is "keeping all his options open."

Of course, Kline's lack of legal experience may mean that he isn't even qualified, but speculation of a Kline-Morrison job swap has been going on since before the election. The speculation has been fueled by the fact that the new Johnson County GOP chair worked for Kline's campaign.

Meanwhile, the Buzz Blog is vibrating with sweet feelings for what it describes as a possible Love Fest within the Johnson County Republican Committee.

What has set the blog on fire is the fact that a combined slate of conservatives and moderates won election to the county committee. Could it be, the blog speculates, that at least one county is healing the long and costly split in the state GOP?

Perhaps, but I wouldn't buy the party hats just yet. If the county Republicans had really felt the love, they would have split the top spots of chair and vice chair between conservative and moderate.

Instead, both spots were kept firmly in conservative hands, while moderates were relegated to the much more lowly treasurer and secretary positions. See the Buzz Blog for the full list of committee members.

Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Counting all the votes in Sarasota County, Florida

By Nancy Jane Moore

It appears that the missing votes in the Sarasota County, Florida, congressional race would have favored the Democrat, Christine Jennings.

An analysis by the Orlando Sentinel of the 17,846 county ballots that lacked a vote in the congressional race indicated that those voters preferred Democrats by a significant percentage in five major statewide races.

Those 17,846 voters represented 15 percent of the total turnout. The votes were cast on a touch-screen machine that does not generate a paper trail. On absentee ballots -- which were cast on paper -- only 2.5 percent of the voters skipped the congressional race. The percentage of touch-screen ballots in Sarasota County with no vote in the race for Congress is six times that of the no vote in the other four counties included in this particular congressional district.

In the governor's race, those whose congressional votes weren't counted favored the Democrat by 6.7 percent. In the Senate race, they voted against Katherine Harris (their current Congresswoman) by a whopping 33 percent. See the Sentinel's graphic presentation here.

Jennings carried Sarasota County despite the no votes, but didn't do as well in the rest of the district. The election has just been certified for the Republican, who won by 369 votes.

As the Sentinel observes:

The analysis does not -- and cannot -- reveal why no congressional choice was recorded on the ballots. It also cannot determine which candidate any single voter might have selected had he or she made a choice.

But the strong performance of other Democrats indicates Jennings would have found a sizable number of supporters within the group.

The Sentinel showed their findings to two political experts and quoted them in their story:

"Wow," University of Virginia political analyst Larry Sabato said. "That's very suggestive -- I'd even say strongly suggestive -- that if there had been votes recorded, she [Jennings] would have won that House seat."

David Dill, an electronic-voting expert at Stanford University, put it this way: "It seems to establish with certainty that more Democrats are represented in those undervoted ballots."

Jennings has filed suit and four advocacy groups are challenging the election as well: the American Civil Liberties Union, People for the American Way, Voter Action and the Electronic Frontier Foundation. EFF has a press release and a copy of the complaint (PDF).

Since it seems very unlikely that such a large percentage of people didn't vote in this particular race, the question is why the votes weren't registered. One obvious possibility is a glitch -- or a hack -- in the programming of the machines themselves.

In a Nov. 26 editorial entitled "Deja Vu in Florida," The New York Times, noting that "if there was a computer glitch it probably changed the outcome of the race," said:

The campaign wants its experts to review the machines' secret computer source code, the programming that runs the computer inside the machine, to look for problems. Election Systems and Software, the company that made the machines, is not saying whether it will allow this. If it resists, the courts should order the company to hand over the code -- a requirement that should, in fact, be routine in all places where electronic voting machines are used.

The Times went on to say that "electronic voting without the full array of protections, including a voter-verified paper trail, is unacceptable."

If a flaw is found in the machines, the only fair solution is a new election. But that will certainly be fought tooth and nail by the Republicans.

According to the Sentinel, a Florida Republican spokeswoman said of the suit:

Christine Jennings is once again allowing her own personal ambitions and the radical political agendas of liberal third-party groups to hijack the democratic process.

I guess having all the votes actually counted is a "radical political agenda" only important to liberals.

Thanks to Jamie Lynk of Sarasota, who alerted In This Moment to the recent developments.

Fred Phelps & the Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kansas: Turning hatred into a religion


By Diane Silver

Once again this blog has been graced by the presence of a member of Fred Phelps' clan. This time it's Shirley Phelps-Roper, the heir apparent to the leadership of Phelps' funeral-picketing empire.

Every time a Phelps visits, I find myself thinking about the true meaning of being saved.

I'm betting that Shirley would think (and probably will comment soon) that I, as a lesbian, have no chance of being saved unless I repent from homosexuality, which I have no intention of doing. She may well argue that the mere fact that I am gay means that I hate God, and that, of course, I'm going to hell and am dragging the country down with me. (Did I get that right, Shirley?)

I think the real issue, though, is how the Phelps family is creating a hell on Earth for its own children. As far as I'm concerned, that isn't even close to holy.

Today's issue -- and the reason for Shirley's visit -- is a news story I mentioned that quoted a Phelps' child as saying he wanted to kill gays. The quote came in a new documentary about the family called "Fall from Grace."

You can read all of Shirley Phelps-Roper's comment here. She describes the documentary scene like this:
(Filmmaker) Ryan Jones to the six-year-old Noah - How does that make you feel when people say those mean things and do those things to you?

Six-year-old Noah - I feel mad . . . I feel mad enough to kill them, but I can't kill them, God has to cast them down to hell.

Shirley, of course, approves of Noah's comments. "Such clarity of thought for a little guy," she writes.

I think: What a horror for this child. I do not condone anyone yelling at or saying mean things to a child. However, the real issue is that his family has so surrounded him with hatred and fear that at the age of 6, he wants to kill.

Shirley complained that I made it sound like the boy intended to kill gays when his comment was only about his feelings. Although this distinction is important, it is also hollow.

This child is surrounded by hate. He has been brainwashed into thinking that only certain people are worthy of love. His family has created monsters out of millions of Americans and painted them (really us, as I'm one of "them") as being so terrifying they need to be killed.

Shirley's comment also ring hollow because it ignores her father's own belief that the death penalty should be imposed on me and all lesbians and gays. In a 1994 story in the Topeka Capital-Journal, Fred noted that the biggest problem with his idea was its' impracticality.

The Bible supports the death penalty for sodomy, he contends. "I'm not urging anybody to kill anybody." But the matter of factly explained his belief that homosexual sodomy should be a crime punishable by death based on his interpretation of the Bible.

The death penalty was violently carried out by God on a massive scale when the biblical cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by fire and brimstone, Phelps said. "I am inclined to the view that the closer man's laws come to God's laws, the better off our race will be."

Phelps is a realistic man. He admits chances of getting the death penalty for sodomy in Kansas is remote.

Shirley, please let me know if the newspaper got your father's quote wrong.

Pain, fear and hatred are not a religion. They're not a path to God. Taking a 6-year-old to picketing sites bathed in anger is not a path to peace. Terrifying a child to the point that he already wants to kill someone at the age of 6 will not save his soul.

As a lesbian I worry about anyone who says they want to kill me and destroy the "evilness" of my plump, middled-aged, mother-of-a-college-kid self. My concern as a parent, though, is far greater. What has been done to this child is a tragedy.

Hospitals to be rated on their treatment of lesbian, gay, bisexual & transgendered patients

By Diane Silver

This new project may just make the difference between life and death or the difference between anguish and comfort for me, my family and friends and for millions of other Americans.

Following the success of its corporate rating program, the Human Rights Campaign is joining forces with the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association to create a new index that rates hospitals.

The first Healthcare Equality Index will be released this coming spring. HRC's Corporate Equality Index rates employers on how they treat LGBT workers.
"We have seen, through our Corporate Equality Index, that these indexes are successful in dramatically moving industries toward a greater understanding and support of policies, standards, and training that insure equal treatment," said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese.

"Given the patchwork of federal and state laws, it is our hope that this index will provide our community with the resources to make sound healthcare decisions for their loved ones. Too many times, a gay man has been unable to comfort his partner, a transgender person has been ridiculed instead of treated, or a lesbian mom has been barred from seeing her child at the hospital. We believe this project will create a 'patient's bill of rights' for GLBT Americans so we no longer have to live in fear of these scenarios."
HRC's Corporate Equality Index has been a great success in providing information to prospective employees and in nudging the corporate world to adopt more fair-minded policies. I look forward to seeing what happens with this new rating system. It is long overdue.

Monday, November 27, 2006

Kansas Monday: Sebelius for president & Fred Phelps on film

By Diane Silver

On this sleepy Monday after Thanksgiving, it's time to shake the cobwebs out of the brain and take a look around. This morning we offer both the good and the awful of politics. First up is a note of possible Kansas pride. Second is yet more on one of the state's enduring shames.

Apologies to Kathleen Sebelius for putting her in the same post as Fred Phelps.

First the fun. Steve and Cokie Roberts name Kansas' recently re-elected governor as the best bet to become president in 2008. The well-connected columnists note that our governor fits all five of their rules for winning. Hat tip to WE Blog for the link.
So who fits all of these rules? What about Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas, a Democrat who won re-election by 17 points in a deeply red Midwestern state? A gun-owning, budget-balancing mother of two sons who grew up in Ohio (where her dad, John Gilligan, was a Democratic governor), she moved to Kansas for grad school and married into an old Republican family (her late father-in-law succeeded Bob Dole in Congress and served 12 years). You heard it here first.
This morning we're also treated to the Topeka Capital-Journal's up-close-and-personal view of Topeka's Phelps family watching a new film about themselves. The documentary was the result of a year of work by Ryan Jones, a senior at the University of Kansas.

Two things stand out in this portrait of a popcorn-munching Phelps clan.

First, there is the bone-chilling moment when one of the family's children speaks on camera about "wanting to kill gays." The watching Phelps respond by erupting in delighted laughter.

Also of interest is the fact that the patriarch of the family, Fred himself, was not present at the gathering. Perhaps the rumors of Fred being ill are true.

The film, by the way, looks like it's worth seeing. It will be shown at 7 p.m. Wednesday in Woodruff Auditorium in the Kansas Union at KU. The viewing is free.

Sunday, November 26, 2006

More on the Supremes and global warming

By Nancy Jane Moore

Today's Washington Post has an editorial emphasizing the importance of the global warming case -- Massachusetts v. EPA -- that will be argued at the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday.

I'm often frustrated by Post editorials, but this is one case where we agree: EPA should be regulating greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act as part of an overall plan to address human causes of climate change. The Post says:
The question of how to handle global warming is the chief environmental issue of our era. Yet the Environmental Protection Agency has refused to assume regulatory authority over greenhouse emissions.
The editorial also points out the tricky legal issue of whether the states have standing to bring suit, since proving injury may be difficult. The trouble with global warming, of course, is that by the time it gets bad enough to create easily proved damages, it will be too late to fix it.

The Supreme Court could decide to duck this case on standing grounds, instead dealing with it. As The Post observes:
That would be frustrating and unfortunate. Nowhere is this administration's resistance to action on global climate change more aggravating than in its persistent refusal to use the legal powers already at hand. What an irony it would be if its lawless inaction survived judicial review because the problem is too big.
We wrote about the case and provided links to the parties' briefs here. A transcript of the oral argument will be made available here on the Supreme Court website on the day of the argument.

Saturday, November 25, 2006

Bush unchastened: business as usual at the White House

By Nancy Jane Moore

Apparently Bush thinks that all he needs to do to co-opt the new Democratic majority in Congress is toss around the word bipartisan and fire Rumsfeld.

The smart thing to do when Bush starts acting like Mr. Nice Guy is to ignore what he says and watch what he does. In the last week, he's done two things that tell me he wasn't really listening to the electorate on Nov. 7:
  • He's renominated four right wingers to serve as judges on the federal courts of appeal. Even The Washington Post says this hits a "discordant note."
  • He's allowed his Secretary of Health and Human Services to appoint a man who objects to birth control as head of the family planning office.
The appointment of extremists as judges should make it clear to the Democrats that Bush has no intention of compromising. He's going to continue to pretend he has a mandate, which, given that he didn't even get the popular vote in 2000 and barely squeaked by (assuming you believe the votes were counted properly) in 2004, is an insult to the people of this country. He's never had a mandate; he's just had a lapdog Congress. Now he doesn't even have that.

The appointment of Eric Keroack to head family planning is scarier, though, because the Senate doesn't get to confirm him. According to Slate, Keroack has served as medical director for an organization that not only opposes abortion, but asserts birth control is degrading to women.

By the way, claiming that birth control and other family planning is bad for women is the latest strategy from the anti-birth-control forces: They're claiming to protect women from the unscrupulous people who want to force them to have sex and abortions -- as if women can't make these decisions for themselves. Stephanie McMillan nailed them in her cartoon on the South Dakota extreme abortion law. We need to watch out for movements such as this that claim to be pro-women while actually working to limit women's rights and options.

Slate says Keroack has distorted scientific research to allege that premarital sex causes women chronic emotional pain, affects their oxytocin levels, and will keep them from bonding with their babies -- a theory that has been exposed as pseudoscientific balderdash. This is the man who is going to develop guidelines for family planning clinics and decide how federal dollars will be spent.

As The New York Times says, "It sounds like a late-night parody of President Bush's bad habit of filling key posts with extreme ideologues and incompetents." The Times goes on to observe:
Americans who were expecting a more moderate administration in the wake of this month's elections may find all this shocking. But to the unchastened Bush White House, apparent opposition to contraceptives, abortion and science was the opposite of disqualifying. It was a winning trifecta.
What worries me the most, though, is how many other Keroacks the Bush administration has appointed to significant policy posts that don't require Senate confirmation. There are likely hundreds, maybe thousands, of ideologues and hacks currently ruining government programs.
And if you figure the Democrats will block the right wing judges and your response to appointments like that of Keroack is "Oh, well, it's only two more years," I have one more scary example for you: War with Iran.

In the Nov. 29 issue of the New Yorker, Seymour Hersh writes:
A month before the November elections, Vice-President Dick Cheney was sitting in on a national-security discussion at the Executive Office Building. The talk took a political turn: what if the Democrats won both the Senate and the House? How would that affect policy toward Iran, which is believed to be on the verge of becoming a nuclear power? At that point, according to someone familiar with the discussion, Cheney began reminiscing about his job as a lineman, in the early nineteen-sixties, for a power company in Wyoming. Copper wire was expensive, and the linemen were instructed to return all unused pieces three feet or longer. No one wanted to deal with the paperwork that resulted, Cheney said, so he and his colleagues found a solution: putting "shorteners" on the wire -- that is, cutting it into short pieces and tossing the leftovers at the end of the workday. If the Democrats won on November 7th, the Vice-President said, that victory would not stop the Administration from pursuing a military option with Iran. The White House would put "shorteners" on any legislative restrictions, Cheney said, and thus stop Congress from getting in its way.
Remember signing statements? Have you noticed how Bush ignores even the Supreme Court, no bastion of liberalism? He isn't listening. The election improved our odds of reining in this imperial and incompetent administration, but we can't just sit back and rely on the slim Democratic majority. We have to keep up the fight.

Thursday, November 23, 2006

We're slowing things down for Thanksgiving


By Diane Silver

We're going to slow things down on In This Moment for the Thanksgiving holiday here in the U.S. , so expect sporadic posting through the weekend.

Meanwhile, last night we celebrated my son's 21st birthday. Wahoo! What a fine man he has turned out to be. I think we are all lucky to have him in this world, and yes, I am totally biased. Also, a special hello to the very important person who is under the weather right now. Get well soon!

For all of us, a huge Kansas sky to provide a break from the hullabaloo of politics.

Wednesday, November 22, 2006

Kansas: "Anti-schools" education head resigns & walks off with $11,000 severance

By Diane Silver

No surprise: Kansas Education Commissioner Bob Corkins resigned today rather than waiting to be fired when the new moderate Board of Education takes over in January.

That's good news No. 1. The second bit of good news is that the board named Dale Dennis as the interim education commissioner. The current deputy commissioner of finance, Dennis is a longtime professional in the department.

I knew him when I covered the Statehouse for The Wichita Eagle. Unless he has changed enormously, Dennis is a solid pro who can be trusted to do a good job. This is in stark contrast with Corkins who got the job without having any education experience and with a reputation for trying to limit funding for public schools.

The Lawrence Journal-World also reports that Corkins received a severance package worth $11,000. I suppose that's fair and legal, but given the damage he may well have done to education in this state, I'm not certain Corkins should receive anything. Once again incompetence is rewarded.

The Lawrence Journal-World has the full story, including this choice quote from a moderate board member.
Board member Janet Waugh of Kansas City said that with Corkins, "who is basically anti-schools," at the helm, the public image of the state"s public education system had been hurt.
I have more on Corkins here.

Janet Reno & Republicans detail the horrors of the Military Commissions Act


Former Attorney General Janet Reno, two former U.S. attorneys appointed by Ronald Reagan and other former justice department officials are going public about their concerns about the Military Commissions Act and George W. Bush's treatment of detainees.

Their concerns are detailed in a friend-of-the-court brief filed in the case of Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri. The Washington Post reports this is the first time Reno has spoken out against the administration. The brief is well worth reading.
(W)e are gravely concerned that indefinite imprisonment of individuals within the United States will become increasingly common -- that the government will choose to avoid criminal prosecutions and the rights associated with them, such as the defendant's right to counsel and the government's obligation to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
In other words, they can lock you up and throw away the key, and you are helpless to defend yourself. This is about as un-American as a law can get.

Kansas evolution standards to evolve slowly towards science

For many of us the needed "spring cleaning" of the mess left by the Religious Right-dominated state Board of Education can't come too soon.

Apparently, though, the anti-evolution, intelligent design-festooned science standards won't be overhauled immediately. The new pro-science majority takes over the board in January.

The cause of the delay isn't sinister, AP reports. It's the wish to "do it right," says Steve Case, associate director of The University of Kansas' Center for Science Education.

That sounds OK to me as long as the changes come as soon as possible.

The Kansas Evolution Aftermath: Corkins' fate may be decided today

By Diane Silver

This afternoon at 3:30, ultra-conservative Education Commissioner Bob Corkins may well be out of the job -- or, at least, that's the speculation of Kansas newspapers.

The state Board of Education meets in a private conference call at that time. Conservatives are still in control of the board and will be until new board members take office in January. However, the mysterious meeting is said to involve "nonelected personnel." Stay tuned.

Corkins, of course, is most well known for having absolutely no education experience before taking office and for constantly searching for ways to funnel public money to private schools.

The sooner he is out of office and the search begins for a qualified commissioner, the better.

Monday, November 20, 2006

Washington is getting a woman as chief of police

By Nancy Jane Moore

Incoming DC Mayor Adrian Fenty has selected Commander Cathy L. Lanier to serve as the city's next Chief of Police, subject to the approval of the City Council.

All I know about Lanier is what I read in The Washington Post and what it says in the very fast bio of her that is now up on Wikipedia, so I won't pretend that I know whether she'll be a good chief.

But I'm thrilled to see a woman named to the job. The more women we have in jobs that were once assumed to be the sole province of men, the more steps we'll take toward real gender equality in this country.

Lanier certainly has good credentials: She started out as a patrol officer and worked her way up to commander in 16 years. She currently heads the special operations unit, which includes counterterrorism and homeland security. Along the way she not only put herself through college, but also picked up a couple of master's degrees, according to The Post.

And like Fenty, she's young -- The Post gives her age as 39. She's also white.

The part of her bio that impressed me the most, though, is that she dropped out of high school in the ninth grade and had a child at 15. Yet here she is, with a solid career about to take a high-profile job. It's good to see someone who didn't let youthful missteps hold her back.

At this point, I'm rooting for her. We'll have to wait and see how well she does the job.

Beating back a marriage ban by making gays invisible & comments on the state of the movement


By Diane Silver

For this very busy day I'm afraid the update will be limited to a couple of links and a few thoughts.

First, The Washington Post analyzes Arizona's defeat of a proposed constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. The Post argues that gay rights advocates in Arizona did it by pretending lesbians and gays didn't exist and focusing on the impact on straight folks, particularly on unmarried elderly couples.

When I have a bit of time, I want to talk about this in more detail. Debate over this kind of strategy is important. In fact, such a discussion (yelling match?) was one of the biggest inside-the-campaign battles of the 2005 effort to stop a marriage ban in Kansas.

I'm not certain there's an easy answer on this one. If this kind of strategy works to help protect lesbian and gay families, though, more states may need to try it. However, using that strategy won't come without a cost.

More later on that subject.

Meanwhile, National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Executive Director Matt Foreman talked about the state of the gay rights movement (pdf) in a speech to the Creating Change conference in Kanasas City this month.

You want to know the state of our movement on November 10, 2006? We are strong, unbowed, unbeaten, vibrant, energized and ready to kick some butt.

We know that as far as we've come, we still have a very, very long way to go.

A post about marriage equality wouldn't be complete without a photo of Del Martin and Phyllis Lyon. Together for 50 years when this was taken, the photo was shot when they were married in San Francisco in 2004.

Martin and Lyon were the first couple to take vows in San Francisco in those incredible days of official civil disobediance. Although their marriage was later legally voided, that fact says nothing about the commitment and love the two have for each other.

Sunday, November 19, 2006

The Supremes take on global warming

By Nancy Jane Moore

The effort to make the US wake up and start dealing with global warming hits the Supreme Court on Nov. 29.

On that date, the court will hear oral argument on whether or not the US Environmental Protection Agency should regulate car emissions that are contributing to climate change -- specifically carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and hydrofluorocarbons. EPA, which has been noticeably less aggressive in pursuing its mandate to clean up the environment during the Bush years, in 2003 denied a 1999 petition seeking such regulation, saying that the Clean Air Act does not permit it to regulate air pollutants associated with global warming.

Outraged by this ruling, a number of states -- led by Massachusetts -- and major environmental groups sued to change the policy. With one judge dissenting, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit agreed with EPA, and the petitioners asked the Supreme Court for review.

Here's the issue in a nutshell as described by the petitioners in their brief on the merits (PDF):
Physical or chemical matter that is emitted into the ambient air is an "air pollutant" under the Clean Air Act. 42 U.S.C. 7602(g). The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) "shall" set standards for air pollutants emitted by new motor vehicles when, in the Administrator’s judgment, they "cause, or contribute to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare." 42 U.S.C. 7521(a)(1). "Climate" and "weather" are components of "welfare." 42 U.S.C. 7602(h).

Carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and hydrofluorocarbons are physical and chemical matter. They are emitted into the ambient air by motor vehicles. A prodigious amount of scientific evidence indicates that they are changing our climate. Several parties asked EPA to regulate these chemicals under section 202(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act because they are "air pollutants" that "may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health and welfare."

EPA denied the petition. Its decision rested on two fundamental errors of law. First, EPA concluded that it had no authority under section 202(a)(1) to regulate air pollutants associated with climate change, and that therefore the chemicals at issue here are not "air pollutants" within the meaning of the Act. Second, the agency decided that even if it had such authority, it would not exercise it, on account of various ad hoc policy considerations not enumerated in section 202(a)(1). The same mistake dooms both legal conclusions: EPA distorted two statutory terms ("air pollutant" and "judgment") and ignored a third ("welfare") in order to inject its own policy preferences into a statute that does not embody them.

EPA's misguided legal conclusions diverted it from the serious scientific inquiry at the heart of section 202(a)(1).
This might be the most significant case before the high court this term. At issue is whether our agency charged with taking care of the environment is going to take global warming seriously or not. EPA's decision in this matter shows how an administration opposed to the true mission of a government agency can corrupt it. I'm sure many career EPA employees are horrified at the agency's refusal to regulate in this area, but they have no clout.

The federal government focused on technical legal arguments in its response brief (PDF): They said the petitioners lack standing -- meaning that they claim Massachusetts and the other parties haven't shown they'll be injured by EPA's refusal to act:
Petitioners have failed to carry their burden of establishing that they will be harmed by the specific agency action they challenge -- EPA's decision not to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles within the United States, which involves only a tiny fraction of global greenhouse gas emissions -- or that their anticipated injuries would be materially alleviated by the judicial ruling they seek. Moreover, petitioners' theory of causation and redressability depends on predictions by their declarants that EPA regulation will set in motion an elaborate sequence of events involving independent choices by non-federal actors, including foreign governments.

Those predictions are far too speculative to establish Article III standing.
They also argue that EPA was reasonable in determining that it doesn't have authority in this matter. And any authority it might actually have is discretionary, not mandatory.

Several states and a number of motor vehicle manufacturer associations intervened in the case. Nine states -- Michigan, Alaska, Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Texas, and Utah -- joined together in a response brief on the merits (PDF) that presents a separate argument. They point out that the states are required to meet EPA-set national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) within their borders and argue:
The Act, however, does not contain any provision for States to reduce air pollution from sources outside of the United States. Therefore, if international sources of air pollution are contributing to a State's inability to meet a NAAQS, it would be impossible for that State to meet the national standard because of the lack of authority to limit such emissions.
They go on to argue:
Section 202 does not, however, allow EPA to set emission standards that would be an exercise in futility where the sources primarily generating the air pollution are outside the United States and where emission reductions from within the United States will have no meaningful effect on protecting public health and welfare.
This is an interesting argument and could carry some weight, though given the seriousness of the issue, I would suggest that states with a significant foreign pollution problem would be well-advised to do everything in their power to control pollution sources they can regulate.

And I would respect their point more if the states that were raising it were not tied so heavily to either the automobile manufacturing industry (Michigan) or the oil industry (particularly Alaska, Ohio, and Texas). One wonders whether their concern is driven more by protecting those businesses than by an argument that they can't clean things up because of pollution from foreign sources.

It is obvious to anyone who drives in the US that car emissions are a significant factor in air pollution. Given the many other improvements to cars over the past 15 years, I have no doubt that the automakers can make reasonably affordable cars that pollute much less if they are forced to do so.

And despite the ravings of James Inhofe, the science-challenged senator from Oklahoma who thinks global warming is a myth, human-caused climate change is the most important issue facing the world today. Under the Republican-controlled Senate, Inhofe has chaired the Environment & Public Works Committee, which is one of the reasons that the federal government has done virtually nothing to address global warming. Fortunately, with the return of the Democrats to power, this situation will change. I don't know how much progress they'll be able to make, but at least the key Senate committee will not be in the hands of an idiot who is refusing to look at real science. See the Real Climate blog for actual information from climate scientists on global warming.

Here are the states, cities, territories, and organizations that have joined with Massachusetts in challenging the EPA position:
California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, the District of Columbia, American Samoa, New York City, Baltimore, Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Food Safety, Conservation Law Foundation, Environmental Advocates, Environmental Defense, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, International Center for Technology Assessment, National Environmental Trust, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, Union of Concerned Scientists, and U.S. Public Interest Research Group.
In addition to the states who signed onto the brief, those government entities and organizations supporting EPA are:
The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, National Automobile Dealers Association, Engine Manufacturers Association, Truck Manufacturers Association, CO2 Litigation Group, Utility Air Regulatory Group, and the State of Idaho.