The Washington Independent - U.S. news and politics - washingtonindependent.com

Obama Celebrates Fourth in Montana

Sridhar Pappu — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 00:07:19 GMT

BUTTE, Mont.—Ralph Maxwell, a former attorney and judge in North Dakota, nearly shook with anger. Wearing his World War II uniform, which he hadn’t taken out of the closet since he came home to restart his life in 1945, he’d just been asked to comment on recent articles and reports where people questioned the patriotism of the presumed Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama.

"That’s bullshit!" Maxwell, 88, said. "That’s bullshit! I am so outraged at that thought. It’s despicable!"

Niceties be damned.

It was early on the afternoon of July 3, and Obama had just delivered a speech outside a children’s museum in Fargo, N.D., where he addressed the concerns of veterans both old and young. Obama was well into his third day of demonstrating his patriotic cred.

During a speech in Independence, Mo., earlier in the week, Obama told the folk from Harry S. Truman’s hometown: "Throughout my life, I have always taken my deep and abiding love for this country as a given. It was how I was raised; it is what propelled me into public service; it is why I am running for president. And yet, at certain times over the last 16 months, I have found, for the first time, my patriotism challenged – at times as a result of my own carelessness, more often as a result of the desire by some to score political points and raise fears about who I am and what I stand for."

"For me," Obama later said at that speech in Missouri, "patriotism is always more than just loyalty to a place on a map or a certain kind of people. Instead, it is also loyalty to America’s ideals -– ideals for which anyone can sacrifice, or defend or give their last full measure of devotion."

Now in Fargo, Obama sought to continue that narrative he had established. In many ways it was the ideal American setting, as he stood among poplar trees in a scene that looked much like a Midwestern farm. He was not speaking in an urban center, like New York or Chicago, but in the heart of the West, where generations of pioneers had journeyed, propelled by their hopes and aspirations for a better life. It’s a place that resonates for Americans in our story as a nation, because it represents all of our beliefs about what we can accomplish starting from nothing. It is where we come to find and, more important, define ourselves and our core beliefs as Americans.

As much as the West is the place where the concept of rugged individualism is mythologized, it is also a place long dependent on government help and government support. Beginning with the transcontinental railroad, the federal government has always been there to serve the public need—to provide roads so ranchers can homestead, to deliver things like water, and then electricity, and other basic necessities of life.

Thus Obama and his ideas about expanding the reach of government don’t necessarily seem out of place here. Because it’s these ideas that allowed Fargo and Independence and Butte, Mont., to exist in the first place. What better place for Obama—who now regularly wears an American flag lapel pin—to make clear his patriotic ideals?

“You’re in a state right here, where we depend heavily on the federal government,” said Bismarck resident Ross Horner, just before the Fargo event. “It’s the No. 1 economic factor here.”

While one expected, at a speech meant for veterans, to see the audience choked with former military personnel, the American legion hats were far and few between. Still, Obama continued to make his case for, well, his Americanness. He spoke of his grandfather, who served during the second war to end all wars, how he had used the G.I. Bill to go to college and build a new life in Hawaii. He spoke of his admiration of those fighting in Iraq, and the need to improve care for soldiers once they came home.

When speaking about his Republican rival’s stand against talking to Iran, Obama stood firm on the need to reach out to the country’s enemies as well as its friends.

“It’s irresponsible,” Obama said of Sen. John McCain’s resistance to talking to Iran. “It’s unpatriotic.”

Leaning on a cane following the event was Bill Anderson, the man who introduced Obama to the crowd. During his own service in Vietnam, Anderson had suffered severe retinal damage—a reaction to the anti-malaria drugs he and his fellow soldiers were given. Today, he is still unable to read.

“There is more to patriotism than a lapel pin or an American legion cap on your head,” Anderson said. “Patriotism is holding onto and advancing the ideals of liberty and justice. Just because you didn’t serve in the military doesn’t mean you’re not a patriot. And just because you did serve doesn’t make you a patriot.”

What’s become apparent in recent weeks is that we are very much a nation struggling with the idea of what it means to serve. Our founders — Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Ben Franklin — never picked up a musket in the service of their nascent country. Yet here we are today, measuring our patriotic ideals and ability to lead by whether a candidate had experienced the act of being in war.

Nearly 50 years have passed since John F. Kennedy asked his fellow Americans to give back—then created the Peace Corps as a new way to serve one’s country and the world. While much has been made of the comparisons to Kennedy, because of Obama’s age and eloquence and ability to move the young, one truly understands Obama as a Kennedy disciple because of what he chose to do and how he chose to serve. He was a community organizer in an underserved section of the most segregated city in America by choice. Yet, still, that effort somehow seems to count less.

Arriving in Butte that evening, it became clear that this was a town in desperate need of service. Once the center of the copper boom, where union battles waged and robber barons prospered, the city itself lies in a kind of stasis. Driving around town, one sees pawnshops and little casinos where you can play electronic keno or poker all night long. At night men with cowboy hats walk with open bottles of beer. The low-rise 60s-style housing set against the mountain vista fills one’s heart with a new sense of dread.

Yet Obama chose to come here. This is a state, with only three electoral votes, that even Franklin D. Roosevelt couldn’t carry. It has only gone Democratic in modern times for Lyndon B. Johnson, in 1964, and Bill Clinton, in 1992—when Ross Perot took 30 percent of the vote. Yet here, where so many dreams were born and eventually died, seemed a perfect venue for the Obama campaign. Butte is a place where the undying faith in country still underlies so many people’s day-to-day existence.

Today, waiting for the July 4 parade to begin, Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer—himself a Democrat and the first of his party to hold the post since 1989—stood in the sweltering heat. Wearing his hallmark bolo tie, that he would later give to Michelle Obama, he laughed easily as he threw a Frisbee with his border collie Jag. That is until the subject of patriotism came up.

“My grand parents came here in 1909," Schweitzer, a bear of a man, said, "and all they had were the clothes on their back and their dreams and hope. I’ll be damned if I will allow people to decide who is patriotic and who is not."

The parade, with all of its traditional trappings began soon enough. You know the scene: trolley cars and dance schools, cheerleaders and martial arts students. Earlier that morning, former Sen. Jesse Helms had died — seemingly taking the last remnants of the Jim Crow era with him.

And here was Obama, seated in temporary bleachers with his wife and two daughters — the older of whom was turning 10. As the floats passed by they became almost indistinguishable — an American family on this most American day.

Obama Willing to 'Refine' Iraq Withdrawal Plan

Sridhar Pappu — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 22:01:12 GMT

FARGO, N.D. —Wait, he’s gonna talk to us again?

That was the feeling among many of the press corps as we finished our lunches, and filed stories from a tent set up at a children’s museum here in beautiful Fargo, when we learned Sen. Barack Obama would make himself available for press questions for the second time in one day. As one reporter noted, there are some weeks where he doesn’t make himself available twice in one week.

Sadly, this wasn’t an act of generosity by the presumed Democratic nominee for president to his campaign chroniclers. He was using this second appearance to, um, clarify earlier remarks when, fresh off a flight from Colorado Springs, he told the group he’d be willing to “refine” his withdrawal plan from Iraq.

“I have always said that I will listen to commanders on the ground. I’ve always said that the pace of withdrawal would be dictated by the safety and security of our troops and the need to maintain stability,” Obama said in the morning. He then added, “That assessment has not changed, and when I go to Iraq and I have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I’m sure I’ll have more information and will continue to refine my policies.”

Not happy with how his comments were reported, Obama convened reporters to say: "We’re going to try this again. Apparently I wasn’t clear enough this morning on my position with respect to the war in Iraq. i have said throughout this campaign this war was ill-conceived, that it was a strategic blunder. I’ve also said I would be deliberate and careful in how we got out, that I would bring our troops home at the pace of one to two brigades per month, and at that pace we would have our combat troops out in 16 months. That position has not changed. i have not equivocated on that position, i am not searching for maneuvering room with respect to that position. What I said this morning and what I will repeat is consistent with what I’ve said over the last two years is that in putting this plan together, I will always listen to the advice of commanders on the ground, but that ultimately I’m the person who’s making the strategic decisions."

Later, when Obama walked to the back of the campaign plane some quickly speculated that he might be making a third appearance. But he’d come back on another matter.

"There are no restrooms in the front," he said as I suddenly found myself face-to-face with the candidate. "I’m gonna have to borrow yours."

The Battle Over Housing the Poor

Mary Kane — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 21:10:21 GMT

A July/Aug. Atlantic Monthly article by Hanna Rosin about how a recent rise in crime in Memphis neighborhoods was linked to the demolition of public housing projects and the dispersal of residents with Section 8 vouchers throughout those communities prompted controversy and comments. The conclusions in the piece seemed to contradict the long-held notion that getting people out of overcrowded, run-down housing projects was the best option for fighting poverty and crime, and for improving their lives. As Miriam Axel-Lute explains in Rooflines.org, a blog published by the National Housing Institute, the article sounds "like fighting words to all low-income advocates, fair housing advocates, and people who don’t believe that the poor are inherently criminal." Some of the criticism turned political, charging Rosin with demonizing public housing residents and giving the right wing new ammunition.

In her posting, Axel-Lute basically tells everyone to calm down, then gives a thoughtful interpretation of the findings:

Everyone acknowledges that many housing projects had a high crime rate. There were many factors contributing to that. It’s actually not particularly more anti-poor or racist to observe that dispersing people out of the projects didn’t always fix the problem. I personally find arguments that crime correlates with poverty because of lack of opportunity, frustration, isolation, unemployment, discrimination, and structural obstacles to be stronger and less patronizing than the idea that if you put enough poor people together the loss of middle-class role models causes crime to sprout out of nowhere.

So I don’t find the Memphis pattern Rosin’s academics describe hard to believe: Large numbers of people facing all those obstacles and challenges and histories were dispersed throughout much of the city and nothing else about their situations changed.

She also points out that none of this is exactly new to housing advocates. The benefits of moving people out of public housing, an idea trumpeted by former HUD Secretary Jack Kemp and other conservatives, always was overblown, she said.

Plenty of housing advocates, often in the pages of Shelterforce, have criticized HOPE VI projects for not providing enough replacement housing or relocation support to allow residents to return, and for disrupting support systems and communities that people valued and relied upon, even as they deserved and wanted a safer and more pleasant physical environment. (I was, in fact, speaking recently with someone new to the field who was remarking on how surprising the apparent widespread support for the clearly questionable HOPE VI was.)

Many people in the housing field have also noted that in many cases people displaced by HOPE VI were not moving far and tended to re-concentrate in near-poor neighborhoods, limiting any good effects that de-concentrating poverty might have had.

I liked Axel-Lute’s post because she raises important questions about housing policy that deserve to be looked at more closely. There’s nothing worse than politicizing the problems of the poor and their need for decent housing, even when it means facing sometimes uncomfortable realities. Also, given how little attention ever gets paid to their difficulties in the first place, I’m not going to find fault with any attempt to take a closer look at what’s goes on in the lives of poor people looking for a safe place to live.

N.D.'s Three Electoral College Votes, Ripe for the Picking

Sridhar Pappu — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 20:52:13 GMT

FARGO, N.D.—Standing on a tarmac in Fargo, N.D. this morning, the press corps traveling with Sen. Barack Obama had every reason to ask what in god’s name they were doing there. Not only had George W. Bush taken the state during the last two election cycles, North Dakota has a paltry three votes in the electoral college. But here was the presumed Democratic presidential candidate, ready to give an address on veterans at a local children’s museum, before leading the group to Montana—which also has a whopping three votes to add.

"I’m a firm believer that 90 percent of success is showing up, and Democrats haven’t been showing up in these places," Obama said of his choice of venue. He later added, "If you look at the trends in many of these states, there are more and more independents who aren’t tied to [a] political party, and I want to make sure we are reaching out to them."

Call it Obama’s version of the "small ball" philosophy that Chicago White Sox manager Ozzie Guillen used to win the 2005 World Series. During the American League playoffs, and later in a tightly contested 4-game sweep of the Houston Astros, Guillen consistently used stolen bases, sacrifice flys and bunts to move players from base-to-base and score—instead of waiting for the three-run homer. Now, Guillen’s fellow South Sider is using the same tactic to win the presidential election—collecting small states instead of focusing all his efforts in Ohio and Florida. Can it work? Just ask the unemployed Clinton campaign staff who took nearly all the major states, including Texas and Ohio and Pennsylvania. Next stop, Alaska!

Jeb Bush, McCain Visit Mexico

Matthew DeLong — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 20:45:00 GMT

MEXICO CITY—As reported earlier, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush accompanied Sen. John McCain on a tour of the Basilica of the Virgin Guadalupe this morning. During the visit, McCain received a blessing from the Basilica’s Monsignor Monroy.

Bush, reportedly in town on business, expressed confidence in McCain’s ability to win in November.

“I think he’s going to win. He just needs to be himself and not let Sen. Obama redefine himself.”

Bush is a savvy politician, and supposedly the favorite son, politically, as far as his own family was concerned. Unfortunately, the Basilica visit was pooled coverage, and that’s all the information we received about the Bush visit. To quote the pool report, the Basilica stop was “No news, a lot of color.”

McCain departed the Basilica for a closed meeting with Mexican President Felipe Calderon. He then attended a closed-press luncheon with the American Chamber of Mexico at the Club de Industriales in the Mexico City Marriott.

Fortunately, we were in the pool for the Industrial Club luncheon. We were supposed to have an opportunity to ask a few questions of McCain before he joined the group of Mexican and U.S. business leaders. However, McCain Press Secretary Brooke Buchanan came in and told us there would be no questions, only a statement from the senator.

McCain’s statement was fairly unremarkable—his standard pro-NAFTA spiel. He said the meeting with Calderon was “very informative,” but didn’t elaborate. The biggest point of interest was a subtle jab he took at Obama’s past remarks that the United States should consider renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement, without mentioning the Illiinois senator by name. On the plane to Colombia, McCain had told reporters he would not criticize Obama while on the ground outside the United States.

“I am disappointed at the suggestion that the United States should unilaterally reopen NAFTA. If there are issues that exist between our countries—whether it be the United States, Canada and Mexico, or other nations with whom we have engaged and ratified treaties—the best way to do that is not in a unilateral fashion, but mutual respect of sovereignty of our respective nations.”

At the moment, we are in the motorcade traveling to the Ixtapalapa police station, where McCain is scheduled to take a tour guided by Mexican Atty. Gen. Eduardo Medina Mora. The presumed GOP nominee is expected to also see a clearly well-timed demonstration of a hostage extraction, after which he will give a media avail where he will expand on his meeting with Calderon. Then, we head to the airport to fly to Phoenix, where I can sleep in my own bed tonight.

Dissolving the Sons of Iraq?

Spencer Ackerman — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 20:21:20 GMT

Marc Lynch reads the United Arab Emirates newspapers because I can’t. The latest talk is that the Shiite coterie around Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has lost patience with the Sons of Iraq and is urging outright disbanding:

According to al-Khaleej, military and political figures around the Maliki regime have been complaining about his silence with regard to the Awakenings, which they allegedly call "American militias." Now that the exceptional circumstances surrounding their formation has passed, these government and military figures reportedly believe, the time has come to break them up and correct what they believe was a strategic mistake by the Americans to support militias full of brutal killers and unreconstructed sectarians.

Marc gives the appropriate caveat about how the story might be a better reflection of Shiite frustration than an accurate prediction of Maliki’s next move. For my part, I don’t understand how Maliki could order the groups dissolved without sparking outright violence. He’d be making the same mistake Paul Bremer did in dissolving the Iraqi Army in 2003. Of course, another Bremer-lesson is that just because a move doesn’t make sense doesn’t mean someone won’t make it.

Mullen's Choice: Troops For Afghanistan Or Troops For Iraq

Spencer Ackerman — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:39:54 GMT

With these words, Adm. Mike Mullen joins the ranks of the reality-based community:

We are exploring a number of options and opportunities to get a better understanding of the scope of the threat and the best means with which to counter it. I’ve made no secret of my desire to flow more forces, U.S. forces, to Afghanistan just as soon as I can, nor have I been shy about saying that those forces will not be available unless or until the situation in Iraq permits us to do so. It’s a very complex problem, and it’s tied to the drug trade, a faltering economy and, as I’ve said many times, the porous border region with Pakistan.

There’s no easy solution, and there will be no quick fix. More troops are necessary, and some of our NATO allies have recently committed to sending more of their own, but they won’t fully ever be sufficient. We need and are pursuing a broader interagency international approach, one that includes infrastructure improvement, foreign investment and economic incentives, and I’m hopeful these efforts will begin to pay off in the near future. But we all need to be patient. As we have seen in Iraq, counterinsurgency warfare takes time, and it takes a certain level of commitment. It takes flexibility.

For years, the Bush administration has either ignored Afghanistan or pretended that America’s resources were elastic enough to accommodate two wars at once. They’re not. You can resource one war. In fact, the more you think about fighting two wars at once—especially when one of them is a war of choice—the crazier it is. "It’s what war is, you know?" said Slim Charles. "Once you in it, you in it."

But here’s the paradox—the rub that frustrates all counterinsurgencies. More troops, at this point, might either be a marginal benefit or actually counterproductive. A former CIA official recently told me:

"There is a natural rhythm in Afghanistan," the ex-CIA official said. "When you have a sufficient number of occupying troops then you become the issue, the resistance is generalized and then you’re in a situation no one has ever solved… If we turn [the current resistance] into a general uprising, we may not get out without humiliation. No one else has."

I don’t know what the magic number is. We’ve managed so far to avoid sparking a general uprising. But that’s no guarantee that an Afghanistan Surge won’t. Still, recognizing that the choice is Iraq or Afghanistan is a baby step forward.

Justice in Hot Water Over Dubious Grants

Matthew Blake — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:35:31 GMT

A new investigation of the Justice Dept. is now gaining traction. The scandal stems from the department’s decision to distribute millions of dollars in federal grants to questionable youth and crime-fighting programs, despite advice from agency staff members not do so.

Two separate reports released last month, one by Congress and one from a nonprofit group document the controversy. The reports assert that a $1.1-million grant to prevent teenage delinquency was given to an abstinence-only sex education program run by Elayne Bennett, wife of the prominent Republican William Bennett. Career Justice staffers had said the education program "made no sense," but a department administrator overruled them. The staff had also rejected a $500,000 grant for a youth golfing program, but that was awarded as well.

These accusations of dubious grant-making are the latest wrinkle in the widening investigation of the Bush administration’s political patronage involving the Justice Dept.

"When organizations cannot be assured that the playing field was level," Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) said in a statement, "we are left with the impression that political favoritism, maybe even total randomness, won out over good government."

McCaskill is specifically investigating local law enforcement grants disctributed by the Justice Dept.’s Bureau of Justice Assistance. A report by the nonprofit Project on Government Oversight revealed that some of these grants had been, without explanation, made exempt from the peer review process—where Justice Dept. staff and law-enforcement experts evaluate the grants.

The House oversight committee is additionally investigating grants by a second Justice Dept. office—the Office of Juvenile Justice and Crime Prevention.

According to a House report, a peer review team of Justice Dept. officials analyzed 104 applications and judged 18 worthy of the $8.6 million in available grants. But in a break from the standard practice, J. Robert Flores, the administrator of the juvenile justice office, who is a political appointee, bestowed five grants not named on the list of recommended programs. A total of ten grants were allotted.

The five not recommended for grants who received them anyway included Best Friends Foundation, the abstinence-only sex education program run by Elayne Bennett, which ranked 53 out of the 104 applications. Justice Dept. staff found the application "poorly written" and "illogical."

Bennett’s husband, William Bennett, was secretary of education under Ronald Reagan and then served as the "drug czar" under President George H.W. Bush, when he headed the Office of National Drug Control Policy. As host of a nationally syndicated morning radio show, he remains a prominent social conservative—despite admitting to losing millions in gambling online.

Elayne Bennett said in an interview that her husband had nothing to do with her group getting the grant. "He’s not plugged into this administration," she said.

The report asserts that it was Elayne Bennett who is plugged in—inviting Flores, his wife Ingrid Flores, Flores’s special assistant, Donni LaBoeuf and her husband, to a $500-per-plate fund-raiser for the Best Friends Foundation. Flores attended, even though he had promised Justice Dept. staff that he would not meet personally with potential grant recipients.

Bennett confirmed that Flores attended the fund-raiser. She also confirmed the report’s assertion that Flores appeared on a "Stop the Madness" panel that her Foundation runs during the summer. Bennett said her group tackles teenage pregnancy and male adolescent violence and because Flores was on the panel he "saw the impact we were having in juvenile crime prevention."

Bennett compared getting a grant while ranking in the bottom half of applicants to a student winning college admission who ranked low in their high school class but can, for example, play the cello. For Bennett, Best Friend’s version of cello skills is "a proven curriculum." Best Friends abstinence program currently reaches 16 public schools in the greater Washington area.

Another "not recommended" grant was $500,000 to the World Golf Foundation’s First Tee Initiative. The program, based in St. Augustine, Fla.—home of the World Golf Hall of Fame—seeks to "impact the lives of young people by providing learning facilities and educational programs that enhance character development through the game of golf." This program ranked 47 out of 104, with some Justice Dept. staff expressing concern it wouldn’t serve a "large population of at-risk kids."

The committee report alleges that Flores met with Joe Barrow, executive director of the First Tee program, and encouraged him to apply for a Justice Dept. grant. This meeting came about after Flores played golf in St. Augustine during the World Golf Foundation’s annual meeting. The World Golf Foundation declined an interview request.

The other three "not recommended" grants were to faith-based initiatives. These include $1.2 million given to Victory Outreach Services, a faith-based community initiative group headed by Lisa Cummins, a former official in the White House office for Faith-Based Initiatives. The committee report indicates that Cummins met personally with the Justice Dept. prior to receiving the grant. Cummins told The Washington Independent that she was advised by her attorney not to speak with reporters.

As the House oversight committee released its report on the juvenile justice grants, a second grant-making imbroglio became public. A Project On Government Oversight report indicated that the Bureau of Justice Assistance local law enforcement Byrne Grant program awarded 13 grants worth about $15 million that were exempt from that department’s peer review process.

Two Byrne Grants have particularly attracted the attention of Congressional investigators: $603,000 to the Fraternal Order of Police of Ohio and $296,000 to the Ohio Office of Criminal Justice Services.

The head of the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Domingo Herraiz, was a top official in the Ohio attorney general’s office between 2000-03, running their Office of Criminal Justice Services (this time period roughly coincides with the Ohio "Coingate" scandal, when the state’s pension fund, the Bureau of Worker’s Compensation, invested millions in a rare coin fund managed by a prominent GOP fund-raiser).

As for the grant to the Fraternal Order of Police, the executive director of the National Fraternal Order of Police, James Pasco, is married to Cybele Daley, a top official at the Office of Justice Programs, whose title is deputy assistant attorney general.

The Project On Government Oversight report noted that, "although Daley does not have decision-making authority for grant awards, this possible conflict of interest should have at least required that grant proposals from any Fraternal Order of Police organization be peer reviewed."

Mark Drum, state treasurer of the Ohio Fraternal Order of Police, said in an interview that he was not aware Daley was married to Pasco until after the grant was awarded. Drum said the grant will go to a school alert system, that notifies parents of school emergencies, like bus crashes.

The Ohio Office of Criminal Justice Services Program will use its grant for a Columbus, Ohio anti-gang initiative. Lindsay Komlane, spokeswoman for the Ohio Dept. of Public Health and Safety, which oversees the Criminal Justice Services Program, said Criminal Justice Services did not talk to Herraiz, their former boss, during the grant application process.

In their pledge to purge earmarks from government spending, Congress voted to delegate the grant-making authority for the Byrne Grant program to a Justice Dept. peer review process. In a letter to the Justice Dept., McCaskill called it "the perfect opportunity to prove competition results in a better final result than the earmarking process."

But after what McCaskill described as "a process so convoluted and opaque that no one can figure out how the awards were determined," it may be a while before Congress hands over more of its grant-giving power to the Justice Dept.

State of Play: Colombian Hostages Freed

Jonathan J. Cooper — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:05:04 GMT

In an operation described in the press as "stunning" and "daring," Colombian military commandos rescued 15 hostages from a Colombian rebel group after years of captivity. The hostages, including three Americans and a French-Colombian politician, had been held in remote jungles by the FARC, a group on the State Dept.’s list of terrorist organizations. The Americans were defense contractors working on anti-drug operations when their plane went down four years ago. The politician, Ingrid Betancourt, was captured while running for president of Colombia six years ago. The freed hostages were flown to a military base in Texas where they will be reunited with their families.

Major American media outlets covered both Betancourt’s reunion with her family and the arrival of the American defense contractors.

Freed hostage Betancourt sees children for first time in six years: ‘nirvana, paradise’ (Los Angeles Times)

Home Sweet Home For 3 U.S. Hostages (CBS News)

Ex-captive meets her kids for 1st time in 6 years (MSNBC)

Ex-hostage reunited with children in Bogota (The Washington Post)

3 hostages rescued in Colombia return to US (Chicago Tribune)

Former hostage Betancourt reunited with her kids (CNN)

Rescued Hostage in Teary Reunion With Children (ABC NEWS)

Hostages Freed in Colombia Returning Home (The New York Times)

National Support for Energy Exploration Up

Suemedha Sood — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:03:48 GMT

A new Pew Research Center study shows that as gas prices rise, so does support for energy exploration. Last week we reported that Rasmussen and Gallop polls had similar findings.

Forty-seven percent of those surveyed by Pew said energy exploration is more important to them than increased conservation, up from 35 percent in February. The percentage of Americans who favor drilling in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is also on the rise. Half of those just polled said they favored drilling, compared with 42 percent in February.

Much of the increased support for exploration comes from groups who are more like to favor conservation, like young people, women, those with college degrees and liberals. Support among young people (ages 18 to 29) for energy exploration has pretty much doubled since February—rising from 26 percent to 51 percent. Support among self-identified liberals has also doubled—from 22 percent to 45 percent.

Drilling in ANWR is still divided along party lines. Republicans are still much more likely than Democrats to support drilling in Alaska’s wildlife refuge.

When Loan Workouts Don't Really Work

Mary Kane — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 16:36:09 GMT

Can we just stop the madness now and come out and say it – voluntary loan workouts aren’t doing much of anything to stem the mortgage crisis? Hope Now, a private sector group assembled by the Bush administration, released its latest numbers on Wednesday and, although they were, well, kind of awful, the Hope folks did their best to spin them. Sure, the number of workouts declined in May, the group said. But they’re on track to complete a total of about 520,000 workouts in the second quarter, the highest since the program began.

Of course it all depends on how you define "workout." If you earn a modest income and you’ve got an interest only loan that recently reset so that your mortgage payment totals close to $4,000 or so – something not atypical these days – you need your loan modified entirely, the terms changed from top to bottom. You’ve got to convince the lender to reduce the interest rate on the loan or to convert it to a fixed-rate mortgage. That’s a true loan workout.

That’s where Hope Now was supposed to come in. The alliance of mortgage servicers, investors, and housing advocates was pushed by President Bush late last year as a private sector solution to the foreclosure crisis. A borrower would call the Hope Now hotline, and counselors would start the process of negotiating with lenders. But from the start, Hope Now was plagued by problems, with too few qualified counselors overwhelmed by too many callers. And lenders didn’t seem that interested in fully participating – they might agree to repayment plans that allowed borrowers to stretch out their debt a little longer, but they weren’t keen on reducing loan amounts.

Giving someone extra time to pay back a loan they can’t afford in the first place doesn’t do much except to push back the day they’ll be foreclosed on. That’s why Hope Now’s regular release of its numbers to prove its progress always has been misleading. The vast majority of the reported workouts are repayment plans, not true modifications. No one knows how well the workouts or the modifications have fared, and details never are released about the nature of the modifications reported. And in the meantime, foreclosures are soaring.

It gets worse. Just as Hope Now was releasing its latest statistics, the California Reinvestment Coalition announced that a survey of its 42 mortgage counseling agencies found that clients were more likely to end up in foreclosure than with a loan workout. The agencies also said that as a whole, the industry was unwilling to agree to loan modifications.

This is worth keeping in mind as debate continues over Congress’ mortgage rescue plan. Lenders certainly would have more incentive to refinance troubled loans under the plan, since the new mortgages would be backed by the government. But it’s all voluntary – lenders don’t have to participate. I wonder if anyone’s looking at Hope Now and wondering just how enthusiastic the mortgage industry will be this time around.

As nothing gets done, there’s just haggling over numbers, dubious claims of progress, and continuing fights in Congress. Here’s a look at what it’s like in the real world for borrowers in trouble, courtesy of The Record in Stockton, Calif.:

William McClamy, with a family of 10 that includes a grandchild, is in a world of hurt and frustration as he has wrestled futilely to get a home mortgage loan modified so he and his family can stay in their Tracy home.

He contacted the lender, Countrywide, when his adjustable-rate mortgage payment was about to jump $1,200 a month to $4,100 and was told the company couldn’t help, because he wasn’t behind on payments yet.

Seven months ago, he was in trouble and couldn’t make full payments and was passed from one Countrywide staffer to another to another. Still, nothing happened, he said. Countrywide didn’t respond to a request for comment.

"We’re in limbo," he said. "We’re looking at foreclosure at any time now. They ignored us. They don’t care."

New at TWI

Laura McGann — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 14:58:32 GMT

Toxins hound Suemedha Sood has an update for us on the Consumer Product Safety Commission—the federal panel that is supposed to protect us from dangerous plastic shower curtains, tainted toys and the like. Over the last few years the commission has seriously deteriorated, losing nearly half its staff. Some lawmakers are on the case.

The Permanent Base Plan Will. Not. Die.

Spencer Ackerman — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 13:32:46 GMT

July 31 is the stated goal for President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki to ink a deal for an enduring U.S. occupation that neither the Iraqi people nor the American people desire. The deal has looked dead before, but the avarice of imperialism is a lot like a George Romero character. McClatchy and The Washington Post report that Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari forecasts smooth sailing. The Post:

Zebari, who recently returned from meetings with U.S. officials in Washington, said the United States had shown "a great deal of flexibility on many thorny issues." In particular, he said, U.S. officials agreed to lift immunity for private security contractors, allowing them to be prosecuted under Iraqi law. The legal shields have enraged Iraqis, especially since 17 Iraqi civilians were killed last year in a shooting incident involving Blackwater Worldwide, a private security company.

McClatchy:

Zebari also said Iraq had insisted that any agreement be subject to annual review. "We are not talking about an agreement that binds Iraq for 25 years or 20 years or 10 years," he added.

Several issues remain to be resolved, including who will control Iraq’s airspace and how many military bases the U.S. can utilize. President Bush has expressed a desire to conclude the agreement by July 31. Zebari indicated that there was still a lot of work to be done on the pact when he characterized the U.S. position as "we can keep our military presence in any country, without a legal framework."

So that’s the plan: to wrap a permanent-occupation deal in the mantle of sovereignty. Hey, look, Zebari is saying, we can review the deal once a year—probably won’t, since they’re keeping our friends wealthy and powerful, but whatevs—and they’re no longer going to let private contractors kill our people at will! No wonder Zebari’s ally, Kurdish warlord/Iraqi President Jalal Talabani is trying to elect John McCain president.

Oh, and there’s this inconvenient fact, reported by McClatchy:

Separately, the U.S. military acknowledged that two Iraqi civilians were killed and nine wounded in southern Baghdad early Wednesday when a 4th Infantry Division 1st Brigade Combat Unit returned fire after insurgents launched rockets at American forces from the West Rashid district. Claiming self-defense, Col. Ted Martin of the 1st Brigade said it was "regrettable when the enemy chooses to use a neighborhood as a battleground." He said his unit would investigate the incident "and will make restitution for any damage or injury caused by our actions."

But the families of those victims are totally reassured by Zebari’s promise that the government will review the permanent-base deal annually.

Jeb Bush to Join McCain in Mexico

Matthew DeLong — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 13:16:19 GMT

MEXICO CITY—The McCain campaign just confirmed that former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush will join Sen. John McCain here today. Bush, the son of President George H.W. Bush and brother of President George W. Bush, will accompany McCain this morning on a tour of the Basilica of the Virgin of Guadalupe—the second most-visited Catholic shrine in the world, after St. Peter’s Basilica in the Vatican.

Bush did not endorse any Republican candidate during the primaries, though he did contribute $1,000 to McCain’s campaign in February—his only donation to a presidential candidate this cycle.

More on this later.

Consumer Safety Panel Weakened

Suemedha Sood — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 12:35:13 GMT

News that shower curtains might make people sick is alerting consumers to the problem of toxins in plastics. A recent report by the Center for Health, Environment and Justice found that some curtains –- sold at major chain stores like Bed Bath & Beyond, K-mart, Sears, Target and Wal-Mart -– contain high concentrations of toxic chemicals like phthalates. These have been linked to reproductive defects and developmental problems in infants.

Parents pay attention when it comes to toxic substances and child safety. They were caught unawares by last year’s toxic toys incident—which led Mattel to recall millions of children’s products made in China. But this summer, concerned parents might hear some good news, because Congress is working to reauthorize and reform the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission was set up in 1973 to "protect the public from unreasonable risks of serious injury or death" from more than 15,000 varieties of consumer products. The agency is charged with enforcing mandatory standards for products, banning and recalling products, researching potential hazards and developing voluntary standards for industry.

Over the years, the commission has grown weak. But only last year did the public begin to take notice. When the agency had to recall millions of children’s toys, it was unable to pass safety rules or take action against violators, The Wall Street Journal reported. A sharp decline in resources is one reason for the agency’s inadequacies. Three commissioners are supposed to run the agency, but for the last two years, there have been only two. Perhaps even worse, in the past several years, the staff has been cut by more than half, to about 400 employees.

Members of Congress have been trying to reauthorize the commission since last year’s toy recall. They hoped to have a new bill before Christmas 2007, but opposition from industry groups stalled the process. This summer, Congress is looking to arrive at a bill that will add staff, strengthen enforcement capabilities and increase transparency at the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

Congress is now ironing out differences between House and Senate versions. The resulting legislation stands to overhaul a commission that hasn’t been reformed in generations. Consumer advocacy groups say the new bill could be influential, depending on what provisions make it through to the final version. It is expected in time for the July 4 recess.

A major provision now being debated would require companies to test for levels of toxins like lead and phthalates, before products go to market. "Currently," said Rachel Weintraub, director of product safety and senior counsel for the Consumer Federation of America, "there is no pre-market testing required for products. If companies do it, they do it voluntarily. Does [voluntary testing] work? No."

The Consumer Federation of America says it’s especially important for manufacturers of children’s products to do testing, and for that testing to be done by independent third parties. "There can be conflicts of interest when companies’ own labs test products," said Weintraub. For example, "the conflict of identifying potential hazards versus selling the product as soon as possible."

The Consumer Product Safety Commission says it also supports mandatory independent third-party testing -– with one caveat. Spokeswoman Julie Vallese said the agency isn’t sure that across-the-board mandatory testing is effective. "There’s the question of whether or not there’s a necessity to test every single product [if] voluntary standards become mandatory," she said.

"What the agency wants to make sure of," Vallese added, "is that in reauthorizing the legislation, what is being tested and what is being tested for makes sense."

For example, Vallese questioned the need to test teddy bears for metals – which wouldn’t be expected to be used in their manufacturing; or the need to test toys for lead if that lead is used in circuitry on the inside of the products.

One amendment being debated would ban phthalates entirely from children’s toys. The American Chemistry Council, the lobbying group for the chemical industry, has spoken out against this. In a press release, the council’s vice president of products, Sharon Kneiss, said:

"Phthalates are among the most thoroughly studied products in the world, and have been reviewed by multiple regulatory bodies in the U.S. and Europe. …After all this study and review, no reliable scientific evidence has found phthalates to cause adverse human health effects."

But the European Union banned phthalates from all toys for children under age three because of concerns over sexual development disruption. Exposure to phthalates affects production of the male sexual hormone testosterone, leading to lower levels. The EU’s Directorate on Health and Consumer Affairs called phthalates "a disrupter of the endocrine system."

In addition, though the Consumer Product Safety Commission has said that phthalates in vinyl toys have “no demonstrated health risk,” last year the state of California banned toys and baby products containing more than trace amounts. The ban was instituted because scientific evidence showed that phthalates can interfere with hormone production, lead to early puberty and cause reproductive health problems.

Still, the American Chemistry Council says it supports reauthorization of the consumer safety legislation. "What the…bill will do is add muscle," said Marian Stanley senior director and manager of the phthalates panel at the council.

A representative of the phthalates industry, Stanley is hopeful that chemical manufacturers won’t be hit with a slew of regulations. She says there’s a good chance that the resulting bill won’t threaten the phthalates industry. "This would not necessarily mean anything for phthalate manufacturers," she said. "[Congress is] not necessarily looking at individual chemicals," she said.

The new legislation –- however it ends up looking -– will strengthen the agency, through increased resources and funding, tougher standards for product safety and an increased ability to enforce those standards.

"It’s very significant," said Weintraub of the Consumer Federation of America. "It’s the most significant reform that there’s been in years and years. And it’s really important because our marketplace has been changing so rapidly."

McCain, One Year After Black Friday

Sridhar Pappu — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 11:30:00 GMT

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo.—It seemed another life ago. Here was Sen. John McCain—the Esquire cover boy and the favorite to win the Republican nomination—letting go of many of his highly paid advisers, his campaign seemingly set amongst the ruins and smoldering rubble of great promise. This was July 2007 and the day everything came down was known to most people surrounding McCain supporters as Black Monday as campaign staff and advisers were sent packing. The money had simply run out.

In many ways it was a pivotal moment in the campaign. McCain—now streamlined and free of many financial burdens—returned to New Hampshire where he’s treated as an adopted favorite son and proceeded to take the nomination on his terms, in his way. Mitt Romney had more cash. Mike Huckabee had the evangelical cred. Giuliani had, well, two kids who hate his guts. But McCain had experience and guile on his side and damn if he didn’t find a way to outlast other candidates with bigger coffers to become the presumed Republican nominee. The Straight Talk Express was back baby!

But now, a year from Black Monday McCain has rerouted the wiring of his campaign once again. He demoted his trusted adviser Rick Davis to a big-picture-job, the kind of post they used to give magazine editors at on the 34th Floor at Time Inc. once it was clear that their day-to-day services running magazines at the company were no longer needed. In his stead comes senior adviser Steve Schmidt, who, according to reported accounts would stop "unforced errors in the campaign."

Unforced errors. Is this Wimbledon? If it is, McCain’s run into trouble in the middle rounds. Though only six points in most national polls, McCain has been hamstrung by a series of missteps and a muddled message. In May he opposed offshore drilling. In June he was for it. He hired and fired lobbyists who’d worked with the military junta in Myanmar. Speeches were made at erratic times, as was his schedule. Supporters weren’t vetted and campaign seemed to lack a coherent message. Davis’ decentralized regional system of running the campaign has been declared a failure.

So comes Schmidt to save the day, whose appointment itself raises more questions about McCain’s viability than any changes Schmidt might make. Say what you will about the missteps of the Obama campaign—’cause there have been plenty. But since the start of his run, the core group of people surrounding Obama have remained the steadfast guardians of the man and his message. They were able to organize a truly national campaign that no one in Sen. Hillary Rodham’s camp could see coming. And now, as Obama stumps in places like Colorado Springs and Fargo, they’re doing precisely the same thing. While Obama preaches change, his foundation remains entirely solid.

There is a chance that we’re making too much of today’s moves. What after all does Steve Schmidt mean to an American voter who isn’t scurrying on and off the Straight Talk Express or having their third drink at the Palm tonight? Democratic operatives might well be salivating at the thought of a rudderless McCain lifeboat, but they’d best be mindful of the man’s ability to outlast such waves. Just ask the rest of the GOP who deemed him a political dead man a year ago today.

Uribe Gives McCain a Going Away Present

Matthew DeLong — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 10:45:00 GMT

MEXICO CITY—Even though McCain campaign staff initially announced there would be no media avail during today’s Straight Talk Express flight from Colombia to Mexico—because Sen. John McCain was napping—there was still plenty of excitement. Approximately one hour into the flight, we received news that Colombian military forces had rescued a group of 15 hostages—including three Americans and French-Colombian politician Ingrid Betancourt, a former presidential candidate who had been held by FARC, left-wing insurgents, for six years.

McCain spokeswoman Brooke Buchanan came back into the press area and informed us that during last night’s meeting between McCain, Sens. Lindsay Graham and Joseph I. Lieberman, Colombian President Alvaro Uribe and Colombian Defense Minister Juan Manuel Santos, Uribe informed the senators that the Colombian government had a plan to liberate the hostages. Buchanan said the rescue was a coincidence and McCain did not know in advance the rescue would take place today.

However, McCain and Lieberman soon came back to give an impromptu press conference as every reporter on the plane crowded into the small open space at the front of the press area. McCain acknowledged that Uribe informed him last night that the mission to liberate the hostages would go forward today. Here is part of McCain’s statement:

“I just finished a phone conversation with President Uribe. He told me some of the details of the dramatic rescue of 15 people who were held hostage. Three Americans are free. Ingrid Betancourt is also free. He says that they are in good condition. He is, of course, pleased with the success of the operation. These are very high-risk operations. Sometimes in the past they have killed the hostages rather than allow them to be rescued. I congratulate President Uribe, the military and the nation of Colombia…Last night, just before dinner, President Uribe and the defense minister did brief us that the operation was going to take place today.”

McCain declined to elaborate on the details of the operation, saying that he didn’t know how much of the information was classified. He also said his visit was not a factor in the decision to move forward with the mission today. McCain dismissed one reporter’s suggestion that the rescue was tied to his visit.

“These kinds of operations require weeks or months of planning…I’m just glad it happened.”

According to The New York Times, the White House was involved in the planning of the operation.

Lieberman said the timing of the rescue was “fortuitous” and Uribe’s willingness to share information about the planned rescue was a “sign of confidence in McCain.”

McCain had repeatedly called for the release of the Americans – and all hostages held by FARC – during his visit to Colombia. He said it was not unusual that Uribe would share plans for a covert operation with him, because he has "been informed [about American operations] as a member of the [Senate] Armed Services Committee for years."

Of course, as news of the rescue spread throughout the press corps, a flurry of speculation erupted about the nature of the timing of the operation. The rescue was compared to Iran’s release of its U.S. hostages in 1981, just hours after President Ronald Reagan took office. It has been suggested that the Reagan campaign secretly negotiated the release – and prolonged the captivity of the hostages in the process.

Without knowing the details of the operation, it seems plausible that the planning did indeed take weeks or months. McCain’s visit was first reported in the press several weeks ago. What is certain is that Uribe values McCain’s unwavering support for the Colombian Free Trade Agreement. While the treaty is currently tied up in Congress, McCain has almost single-handedly kept it in the news by constantly talking about it at campaign appearances and press conferences.

Whether or not the timing of the rescue was a coincidence, however unlikely that might seem, Lieberman was right. It is fortuitous for McCain. It helps to bolster the image McCain seeks to project – an experienced statesman who can get things done. He can consider this a nice going away gift from his friend in Bogota.

War Contractors May Actually Have to Follow the Law

Matthew Blake — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 19:10:00 GMT

The New York Times reports that in the midst of negotiating their continued presence in Iraq, the U.S. has made a potentially huge concession—U.S. government contractors would no longer have immunity from Iraq law. The Iraqi Foreign Minister said such an agreement was made yesterday, reversing an immunity provision drawn up in 2003 by Paul Bremer, then head of the Coalition Provisional Authority.

Spencer has been blogging about these negotiations, and how they might lead to permanent U.S. military bases in Iraq. But regardless of the negotiation’s final outcome, the stripping of immunity could be bad news for notorious contractors. These include Blackwater, whose private security guards opened fire on a public square killing 17, and KBR, whose faulty wiring of a military compound resulted in a soldier getting fatally electrocuted while showering.

There probably won’t be retroactive prosecution of these cases. But the next front-page contractor scandal could prompt the Iraqi government to use its new legal power.

Waxman: White House Knew Of Hunt/Kurdistan Oil Contract

Matthew Blake — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 19:03:08 GMT

Today the House oversight committee released a reportasserting that the White House knew about an oil deal between the Kurdistan regional government and Texas-based Hunt Oil, though President George W. Bush had claimed he knew nothing about the contract before it was announced. According to the report, Ray Hunt, President of the company, talked to Bush administration advisers months before the deal was made. Also, officials at the Commerce and State departments encouraged the deal and even congratulated Hunt after obtaining the contract.

The deal embarrassed the Bush administration and outraged the Iraqi government when it was announced in September. Bush criticized both parties for making a deal that bypassed the Iraqi national government, especially impolitic as a national oil law was still not established.

In a letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, committee chair Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.) asked whether the Bush administration also played a bigger role than they claim in recent Iraq oil contracts given to Exxon Mobile, Shell, BP and Chevron. The New York Times reported Monday that the State Dept. assisted the Iraq oil ministry in rewarding these contracts.

The nature of this assistance and how much it’s dictated Iraqi oil deals is unknown. Surely, though, Rice will immediately respond to Waxman’s questions and the matter will quickly be settled.

McCain on Free Trade in Colombia

Matthew DeLong — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 18:45:15 GMT

CARTAGENA, Colombia—After a closed press meeting with Colombian soldiers wounded while fighting FARC rebels, Sen. John McCain and his entourage, including his wife and Sens. Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.) and Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.), received a briefing on Colombian drug interdiction efforts. The Arizona senator and his wife toured a port by fast boat. The group later returned to the hotel for a press conference with international press.

McCain began the conference by praising the Colombian foreign minister, who had been held hostage by FARC for six years, and called for all hostages to be freed, including three Americans.

"I consider him an international hero. Now we have to free all the others still being held hostage by the FARC."

Cindy McCain took a rare turn behind the microphone to speak about her humanitarian work as a board member of HALO Trust, a charity that works for the removal of land mines. The Colombian jungle is strewn with the explosive devices, a reminder of government’s war with FARC.

"I, along with my husband, today saw firsthand once again what land mines can do to the human body, and also what land mines can do to the future economy of a struggling country. As a philanthropist and a humanitarian, once we as HALO Trust members believe the country is safe and secure again, we will be back to make land safe for the return of adults and children."

Graham, dripping with sweat from the sweltering humidity, announced he would be leading a jungle tour later in the afternoon. He said he was not much of a free-trader, but supported the Colombia Free Trade Agreement.

"I’m maybe not the most active free trader in the Senate or the House, because my state has suffered the loss of textile jobs. Many Americans are worried about the global economy and the outsourcing of jobs and how free trade may affect our jobs and country. I understand that. ... I am convinced that the Colombia Free Trade Agreement is good for America. Over 90 percent of products coming from Colombia to the United States pay no duty, and 80 percent of products coming from America to Colombia do pay a duty. I am told that in the first year, over $1 billion of exports would leave America to Colombia, creating American jobs.

McCain went a step further, saying the United States should continue to work with the Organization of American States. He said he would like to see a hemispheric free trade agreement. Graham also commended President Alvaro Uribe for improving Colombia’s human-rights record.

"On the human-rights front, for a 10-year period there were two prosecutions for violence against labor leaders. Since President Uribe has been in charge, there has been over 100 cases brought. The Colombian government spends $40 million per year to provide security for labor leaders. President Uribe needs to be congratulated and his aggressive position regarding the rule of law needs to be rewarded."

Asked about reports that he got physical with a Sandinista official in Nicaragua in 1987, McCain offered a flat denial.

"I must say I did not admire the Sandinistas very much, but there was never anything of that nature. It just didn’t happen."

With that, McCain’s 22-hour visit to Colombia came to an end. Now he’s off to Mexico City.