A federal appeals court today rejected Terry Schiavo’s parents’ latest attempt to get her feeding tube reconnected. In his concurrence, Judge Stanley Birch, a Bush I appointee, became the first judge to declare Congress’s actions in the case unconstitutional:

A popular epithet directed by some members of society, including some members of Congress, toward the judiciary involves the denunciation of “activist judges.” Generally, the definition of an “activist judge” is one who decides the outcome of a controversy before him according to personal conviction, even one sincerely held, as opposed to the dictates of the law as constrained by legal precedent and, ultimately, our Constitution. In resolving the Schiavo controversy it is my judgment that, despite sincere and altruistic motivation, the legislative and executive branches of our government have acted in a manner demonstrably at odds with our Founding Fathers’ blueprint for the governance of a free people — our Constitution.

The Great Falls Tribune today shows exactly how far to the right the conservative movement has moved. Right-wing legislators in Montana have come down on the side of abusive tax shelters, voting against commonsense legislation to close these loopholes bening taken advantage of by tax evaders.

As the Tribune notes, the bill they are opposing “goes after illegitimate income-tax shelters by requiring businesses and individuals to file additional information on transactions that may be taxable. It says those who fail to provide such information shall pay a $10,000 fine for an individual and $50,000 for a business. It also attempts to crack down on those avoiding capital-gains taxes on real estate sales. [And] it targets Montana people or businesses who establish residency in a state without income taxes for the purpose of selling property, so they don’t have to pay Montana income taxes.”

So basically, if you are against this, as the right-wingers are, you are actually FOR abusive tax shelters that rip off regular taxpayers and rob state government of revenues it needs for basic services. How much farther right can these people go before they want to officially turn the government over to special interests and the wealthy?

Gov. Jeb Bush has been looking for ways to “rein in” Medicaid spending in Florida, which he claims is “devouring” the state budget. The Governor has mentioned funding cuts and partial privatization as potential options. One thing he hasn’t explored: kicking Wal-mart off the dole.

The St. Petersburg Times reports Wal-Mart, “which is getting millions of dollars in state incentives to create jobs in Florida, has more employees and family members enrolled in Medicaid than any company in the state.” The paper reports the state has paid Wal-Mart more than $51 million in incentives since 1981. By way of gratitude, the superstore is letting Florida taxpayers foot the bill for the 12,300 workers and dependents it pays so poorly that they qualify for Medicaid, the state’s health care program for the poor.

Not that Gov. Bush would ever want to force “one of our nation’s great companies” (in Vice President Cheney’s words) to pay its fair share.

From the Journal Star of Lincoln, Nebraska:

President Bush’s proposal to revise Social Security to authorize personal investment accounts isn’t likely to gain congressional approval, Republican Rep. Lee Terry said. “I don’t see the votes there,” the four-term congressman and dean of Nebraska’s House delegation said in a Lincoln interview this week.

[snip]

“If I were an adviser, I’d tell the president to quit talking principles and present a plan. Get a specific plan and start advocating it.”