|
|
Tuesday, May 31
John Drury: Legislative Session Nothing to Boast About
by
John Drury
on Tue 31 May 2005 03:25 PM CDT
 Legislative Session Nothing to Boast About
by John Drury
Iowa
Senate Democratic leader and potential gubernatorial candidate Mike
Gronstal was in Mason City the other day. He apparently is on a tour of
the state looking for press and support of his possible run for the
governor’s office.
He is
calling the recent legislative session “historic”, pointing out that
the divided senate forced both parties to listen to the other side. He
boasted about some of the accomplishments of the session such as more
money for schools and the legislation to reduce the number of meth labs
in the state.
First
off, it’s a sad day in Iowa when simply listening to the other party is
considered historic. And if you talk to school boards and
superintendents, they will tell you that giving them 4% allowable
growth after years of under-funding doesn’t come close to enough money
to properly fund public education. And if your school’s enrollment is
on the decline as a lot of them are, there is no new money. The meth
lab legislation is something I would have voted for but since 85% of
the meth problem comes from out of state, I would realize that we
probably haven’t even scratched the surface of the problem.
What he
can’t boast about is how the state legislature has failed to address
the “brain drain” problem. Sure, the senate Republicans got a lot of
press when they announced their no tax under 30 plan; but after being
mocked in the Op-Ed page of the New York Times they more or less
admitted it was nothing more than a gimmick and dropped the idea.
What he can’t boast about is how the state has failed to help thousands of working Iowans by raising the minimum wage. We
even heard the senate Republican leader say that he didn’t see that it
was an issue because he doesn’t know anyone working for minimum wage,
almost at the same time one legislator called the state’s workers
“bottom feeders.” Not
only did we not raise it, we sat idly by while Minnesota did the
responsible thing and raised it by a dollar to $6.15. Quite frankly,
it’s almost embarrassing to sit here and argue for a $6.15 minimum
wage. Even that falls piteously shy of a living wage.
What he
can’t boast about is that according to a recent Des Moines Register
article, the state has dropped to 49th in the nation when it comes to
public land for recreation. And even though recreation is essential to
keeping residents in the state and attracting tourists, just 2
percent of Iowa is public recreation land. According to the article,
years ago state lawmakers set a goal to have ten percent of Iowa in
publicly controlled lands. I think we have a ways to go. Only the state
of Kansas has less land for public recreation than we do. On a lighter
note, we may now have a new state slogan ... “Thank God for Kansas!”
What he
can’t boast about is how the legislature failed to listen to the
concerns of organic growers in the state before they passed the
infamous seed de-regulation bill. The legislature enacted pre-emptive
legislation that prevents local governments from regulating the types
of seeds grown in their communities or counties. Essentially, they are
now regulating de-regulation. So in retrospect, I guess that is kind of
“historic.”
What he
can’t boast about is that even though we are in a difficult budget
crisis, we somehow found money for a pay increase for state legislators.
What he
can’t boast about is how the state has failed to make it easier for
Iowans to get affordable prescription drugs from Canada. Currently,
there are only four U.S. states that openly encourage their citizens to
buy prescription drugs from Canada: Kansas, Illinois, Missouri, and
Wisconsin. Maybe the senate Republican leader doesn’t know anyone that
can’t afford to buy their prescription drugs.
If this session was truly historic, then let’s hope history doesn’t repeat itself.
The GOP Agenda
by
Chad Thompson
on Tue 31 May 2005 12:25 PM CDT
 The GOP Agenda
I just have to point out an interesting post at the DailyKos, in case anyone has missed it: The "GOP Agenda", in bullet point form.
U.S. House
Change ethics rules so DeLay can be as corrupt as he wants.
Destroy Social Security
Pass MBNA's bankruptcy elimination bill.
Meddle in the Schiavo family's private business
Prevent life-saving stem-cell research
U.S. Senate
Destroy Social Security
Pass MBNA's bankruptcy elimination bill.
Meddle in the Schiavo family's private business
Violate Senate rules to destroy historical protections for minority rights
Prevent life-saving stem-cell research
George W. Bush
Destroy Social Security
Pass MBNA's bankruptcy elimination bill
Destroy Social Security
Terri Schiavo
Destroy Social Security
Destroy separation of powers doctrine - get involved in Senate fight over filibuster
Prevent life-saving stem-cell research
Not surprisingly - none of the 'agenda' items comes close to following the supposed priorities of the 2004 election.
In other "Links To Watch" news - Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo opened a new group-based site called TPMCafe.com.
The Table For One section currently is hosting a "guest blog" by John Edwards.
Monday, May 30
Bush and 9/11: Is America in Denial?
by
Trish Nelson
on Mon 30 May 2005 08:41 AM CDT
 Bush and 9/11: Is America in Denial?
TvNewsLIES.org
In his two latest books [The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions and The New Pearl
Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11] and during
a powerful television presentation [C-Span Book TV May 7, 2005], David Griffin,
theologian and 9/11 researcher, put
together the most thorough analysis to date of the official Kean commission
report on 9/11. Griffin’s
examination provides a series of powerful arguments for likely government
complicity in the attacks.
David Ray Griffin is not a crackpot or a conspiracy
theorist. He is a theologian with a highly impressive background in religious
philosophy who is passionately pursuing the truth about 9/11. He is also a
fearless American, concerned that the conclusions of the Kean Commission
whitewash much of the conflicting evidence about the attacks that has been
unearthed. His appeal is clearly directed at the religious community in this
country, whose basic precepts of goodness, decency and truth should loudly
demand an open inquiry into the evidence known today.
Griffin classifies public sentiment of the events of
September 11th by breaking it down into 4 classifications. In summary, they are
as follows:
1. Those who believe that Al Qaeda outsmarted the global
intelligence community and surprised the US
with the attacks and the Bush administration is responding accordingly.
2. Those who believe that Al Qaeda outsmarted the global
intelligence community and surprised the US with the attacks and the Bush administration is taking political advantage of
the situation.
3. Those who believe that the Bush administration
permitted the attacks to occur in order to take political advantage of the
situation.
4. Those who believe that the Bush administration is
complicit in the orchestration of the attacks in order to take political
advantage of the situation.
We feel there is an even more revealing classification. It places the American public in only TWO
major groups:
1. Those who feel that the Bush administration, at the
very least, had the opportunity to stop
the attacks, and at the very most, orchestrated them.
2. Those who refuse to objectively examine or listen to
evidence that indicates complicity by
the Bush administration.
We firmly believe that those people who fully believe the
conclusions of the Kean Commission have never seen or heard any of the compelling
evidence to the contrary.
(Click here to read the entire article)
 Click here to sign up for action alerts
from RapidResponse - Iowa
Sunday, May 29
The Political-Industrial Complex, Part II
by
Trish Nelson
on Sun 29 May 2005 08:14 AM CDT
 The Political-Industrial Complex, Part II
The Prairie Progressive
by Jim Larew
In
contrast with the era of the Iowa Democratic Party’s modern rebirth,
today, in too many instances, within the same Party, the proper order
of priorities has been reversed. An emphasis on organizational
politics, and concerns about the need for money to finance those
organizations, now frequently supplants and precedes any overt
commitment to liberal and progressive core values.
This
premise—that the Iowa Democratic Party needs to re-commit itself to a
substantive progressive agenda before focusing on matters that mere
technological fixes cannot remedy—is increasingly obvious to many party
activists, particularly in light of the November 2004 election.
But this
viewpoint is not frequently spoken about by Democratic Party officials
or by candidates who seek the support of Democratic Party activists.
Indeed, apologists for the losing status quo, persons whose voices are
given disproportionate access to the public forum, too frequently
explain and excuse the sad events of November 2004 with implausible
rationales.
Some of
these apologists are themselves entrenched in a formidable, growing new
industry, an expensive phenomenon that might well be called the
“political-industrial complex.” Often acting in the
capacity as “political consultants” and “experts,” their survival
appears impervious to political defeat. Ironically…participation
in losing causes appears to provide solid credentials for the next
campaign season.
If the
Party’s future is to be different than its recent past, its members
must re-establish the correct order of priorities. A dedication to
fundamental liberal values must precede any grand schemes for new
campaign machineries and strategies to finance the same.
A
successful Iowa Democratic Party of the future will be infused with
progressive and liberal ideas, led by persons who are at least as
concerned about the contents and substance of our State’s future
policies as they are about getting voters to the polls on time.
Only with sound, progressive public policies can citizens hope to enter and to remain in our increasingly fragile middle class.
~ Jim Larew is an attorney in private practice in Iowa City
To read the entire article (Part II), see the Summer 2005 issue of the Prairie Progressive, Iowa's oldest progressive
newsletter, available only in hard copy for $12/yr. PP, Box 1945, Iowa City
52244. Co-editors
of The Prairie Progressive are Jeff Cox and Dave Leshtz.
Click here to sign up for action alerts
from RapidResponse - Iowa.
Saturday, May 28
Bush's Anti-New Deal Trifecta
by
Trish Nelson
on Sat 28 May 2005 10:10 AM CDT
 Bush's Anti-New Deal Trifecta
MinutemanMedia
by Donald Kaul
Seldom does a single event
in Washington seem to summarize an entire era, but last month saw such
an event. Congress passed the 2006 federal budget, which gave a huge
tax cut to the rich, took away money from the program that funds health
care for the poor and opened the way for oil drilling in the Alaskan
wildlife refuge.
That,
ladies and gentlemen, is an anti-New Deal trifecta: Soak the poor,
enrich the rich and to hell with effete concepts like “wilderness” and
“conservation.”
My favorite quote of the day was supplied by none other than House Majority Leader Tom (Greasy Thumb) DeLay, who said:
”This
is the budget the American people voted for when they returned a
Republican House, a Republican Senate and a Republican [pseudo-]president to the
White House.”
Yes they did (although they may not have known it at the time).
And, as
if Congress hadn’t done enough mischief, [Bush] followed by
suggesting that the Social Security deficit can be ameliorated by
cutting benefits.
At times like these I think of H.L. Mencken, who said:
”Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.”
That’s where we’re at now folks, getting it good and hard.
I
know what you’re thinking. If the Republicans are such a malign party,
inhospitable to the majority of the American people, how do they get
elected?
I have a theory, several as a matter of fact:
1.
Some people are Republicans by birth or habit or conversion. They
identify with the GOP and simply cannot bring themselves to vote for a
Democrat, no matter what. (Comparable Democrats are called “Yellow Dog
Democrats,” because they’d vote for a yellow dog if he appeared on the
Democratic ticket. Republicans like that might be termed “Bush
Republicans.”)
2. Some
people are rich. They don’t need a safety net; they’re attached to a
bungee cord. They think what’s good for them is good for the country
and they have their Mercedes to prove it.
3. Some
people consider the wall between church and state an impediment to a
moral society and see the Republican Party as the means to tear it
down. These often are the same people who read the Bible mainly in
order to memorize its prejudices.
4. Some
people are dumb as dirt. We have raised successive generations of
Americans who are accustomed to getting their information from
television, where there is none. Thus they are easy prey to cynical
campaign tactics that unfairly demonize opponents and mask true
intentions (like lowering your Social Security). Both parties play this
game, but the Republicans are much, much better at it.
Add them
all together and what do you get? A Republican House, a Republican
Senate and a Republican [squatter] in the White House.
That’s my theory and I’m sticking to it.
One more
word about Social Security, however. Despite his honeyed words, [Bush]
is not trying to save the program for future generations. His
aim is to get rid of it and the Trojan horse he has chosen as a weapon
is “private accounts.”
Whether
one will accumulate more or less retirement money in private accounts
is a matter for legitimate argument but this much is clear: once people
accept the notion that they’re saving for their own retirement and no
one else’s, the concept of Social Security as a shared responsibility
for the aged is doomed.
Because
the next argument will be: What right has the government to force me to
invest for my own retirement? If I want to invest in a flat-screen
television instead, I should be able to. It’s my money. That’s an
argument that will appeal to many young wage earners.
It won’t
happen this year or the next or the next decade, probably. But the
Republicans have been hacking away at this for the past 40 years or so.
They’re not going to stop any time soon.
Donald
Kaul recently retired as Washington columnist for the “Des Moines
Register.” He has covered the foolishness in our nation’s capital for
29 years, winning a number of modestly coveted awards along the
way. You can find him weekly at MinuteManMedia.
Click here to receive action alerts from Rapid Response -
Iowa
Friday, May 27
How to Lose a Country in Seven Easy Steps
by
Linda Thieman
on Fri 27 May 2005 11:06 AM CDT
 How to Lose a Country in Seven Easy Steps
by Eric Alterman, MSNBC.com (I'm not kidding)
OK, let’s take this step by step, lest we be accused of sounding shrill, ideological or just plain out of our respective minds.
Point one: The Bush administration is, as this piece
in today’s Washington Post puts it, working to “consolidate influence
in a small circle of Republicans and to marginalize dissenting voices
that would try to impede a conservative agenda.” ...
Point Two:
They are doing so with a historically unprecedented, at least in this
country, degree of secrecy, and therefore lack of accountability....
Point Three:
These same people, acting with unprecedented centralization of power,
and secrecy, have taken it upon themselves to suspend the most basic
rights enumerated in our constitution, and are carrying out the
functional equivalent of a police state....
Point Four: While they pay rhetorical tribute to “democracy,” they side with tyrants whenever convenient....
Point Five:
In response to even the most carefully documented evidence, the White
House simply refuses to engage and, instead, impugns the character of
those who present it, like this:
“In response, Scott McClellan, the White House spokesman, said, 'I
think the allegations are ridiculous, and unsupported by the
facts.'" They also take Orwellian doublespeak to a level that
would have embarrassed Orwell. “'We've also - are leading the way when
it comes to spreading compassion,’ Mr. McClellan said."
Point Six:
And one reason they get away with it is that many in the media, even
alleged “liberals,” are eager to help. And I don’t mean just Fox,
Rush, and the entire structure of the conservative echo machine....
Point Seven:
No less important in allowing it all to take place, is that the
so-called “Gang of 500,”—the insiders of the mainstream media, do not
really care about any of the above....
(Click here to read the complete article.)
Congress Considers Increasing New PATRIOT Spying Powers
by
Linda Thieman
on Fri 27 May 2005 01:27 AM CDT
 Congress Considers Increasing New PATRIOT Spying Powers
Electronic Frontier Foundation
The Senate Intelligence Committee is currently considering a draft bill that would not only renew the USA PATRIOT Act's worse provisions, but would
also expand the government's power to secretly demand the private
records of people who aren't suspected of any crime - without a judge's
approval.
The
Justice Department already has dangerously broad subpoena powers under
the USA PATRIOT Act. PATRIOT Section 215 allows intelligence
investigators to demand all kinds of private records about citizens who
aren't suspected of spying or terrorism. PATRIOT Section 505,
meanwhile, expanded the government's ability to use "National Security
Letters" to secretly obtain data on private online and financial
activities without court oversight or probable cause.
The new
bill not only makes these highly controversial provisions permanent, it
marries the worst aspects of the two, allowing new "administrative
subpoenas" in national security cases that would let the government
secretly demand all types of records without a judge's permission.
The
Justice Department tried to get this super-charged subpoena power
inserted into PATRIOT back in 2001. But even in the immediate aftermath
of 9/11, Congress refused to allow this kind of unchecked surveillance
power.
(Source)
Thursday, May 26
Secret GM Food Study: Rats Get Sick from Eating It!
by
Linda Thieman
on Thu 26 May 2005 07:12 AM CDT
 Secret GM Food Study: Rats Get Sick from Eating It!
By Geoffrey Lean, Independent.co.uk
Rats fed GM corn due for sale in Britain developed abnormalities in blood and kidneys. So what might it do to humans?
Rats fed
on a diet rich in genetically modified corn developed abnormalities to
internal organs and changes to their blood, raising fears that human
health could be affected by eating GM food.
The
Independent [last Sunday] reveal[ed] details of secret research carried
out by Monsanto, the GM food giant, which shows that rats fed the
modified corn had smaller kidneys and variations in the composition of
their blood.
According
to the confidential 1,139-page report, these health problems were
absent from another batch of rodents fed non-GM food as part of the
research project.
The
disclosures come as European countries, including Britain, prepare to
vote on whether the GM-modified corn should go on sale to the public. A
vote last week by the European Union failed to secure agreement over
whether the product should be sold [there], after Britain and nine
other countries voted in favour.
However,
the disclosure of the health effects on the Monsanto rats has
intensified the row over whether the corn is safe to eat without
further research. Doctors said the changes in the blood of the rodents
could indicate that the rat's immune system had been damaged or that a
disorder such as a tumour had grown and the system was mobilising to
fight it.
...Dr
Michael Antoniu, an expert in molecular genetics at Guy's Hospital
Medical School, described the findings as "very worrying from a medical
point of view", adding: "I have been amazed at the number of
significant differences they found [in the rat experiment]."
Although
Monsanto dismissed the abnormalities in rats as meaningless and due to
chance, reflecting normal variations between rats, a senior British
government source said ministers were so worried by the findings that
they had called for further information.
Environmentalists
will see the findings as vindication of British research seven years
ago, which suggested that rats that ate GM potatoes suffered damage to
their health. That research, which was roundly denounced by ministers
and the British scientific establishment, was halted and Dr Arpad
Pusztai, the scientist behind the controversial findings, was forced
into retirement amid a huge row over the claim.
Dr
Pusztai reported a "huge list of significant differences" between rats
fed GM and conventional corn, saying the results strongly indicate that
eating significant amounts of it can damage health. The new study is
into a corn, codenamed MON 863, which has been modified by Monsanto to
protect itself against corn rootworm, which the company describes as
"one of the most pernicious pests affecting maize crops around the
world".
Now,
however, any decision to allow the corn to be marketed in the UK will
cause widespread alarm. The full details of the rat research are
included in the main report, which Monsanto refuses to release on the
grounds that "it contains confidential business information which could
be of commercial use to our competitors".
(Source)
Contributed by Larry Hanus of Waterloo
|
|
