ThinkProgress Logo

Politics

NYT report: National Security Agency tried to spy on a member of Congress.

The New York Times’ Eric Lichtblau and James Risen report that the National Security Agency engaged in “overcollection” of e-mail messages and phone calls of Americans last year. The legal authority given to the NSA authorizes the surveillance of targets “reasonably believed” to be outside the United States. The Obama Justice Department said it “detected issues that raised concerns,” but claims that the problems have now been resolved. “[T]he issue appears focused in part on technical problems in the N.S.A.’s ability at times to distinguish between communications inside the United States and those overseas.” Lichtblau and Risen document one particular instance of misconduct involving the wiretapping of a member of Congress:

And in one previously undisclosed episode, the N.S.A. tried to wiretap a member of Congress without a warrant, an intelligence official with direct knowledge of the matter said.

The agency believed that the congressman, whose identity could not be determined, was in contact — as part of a Congressional delegation to the Middle East in 2005 or 2006 — with an extremist who had possible terrorist ties and was already under surveillance, the official said. The agency then sought to eavesdrop on the congressman’s conversations, the official said.

The official said the plan was ultimately blocked because of concerns from some intelligence officials about using the N.S.A., without court oversight, to spy on a member of Congress.

Congressional officials said they have “begun inquiries” into the matter.

Update

Kevin Drum writes, “Looking on the bright side, maybe this will finally motivate Congress to take NSA surveillance more seriously. Having one of their own members come within a hair’s breadth of being an NSA target ought to concentrate their minds wonderfully, if anything will.”

Politics

‘Grassroots’ Chicago tea party organized with the help of the right-wing Heartland Institute.

This afternoon on MSNBC’s Hardball, host Mike Barnacle had Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) and Chicago tea party organizer John O’Hara on to discuss the tea party protests. Throughout their discussion, both Pence and O’Hara repeatedly claimed that today’s protests were nothing more than a “grassroots” movement that had finally reached a boiling point. It wasn’t until Barnacle pressed O’Hara on how he got involved with the protests that O’Hara explained that he worked for the right-wing think tank, the Heartland Institute. Still, O’Hara claimed he only worked on the tea party project in his “spare time — on weekends and nights“:

BARNACLE: Why are you involved in this?

O’HARA: I work at a free-market think tank, the Heartland Institute here in Chicago. In my spare time, on weekends and nights, leading up to the Feburary 27 tea parties, my good friend J. P. Freire…at the American Spectator invited me and asked me if I could help get some momentum behind a tea party in front of the White House. I did and we had over 300 people show up. … Ever since then you’ve had thousands come out.

Watch it:

Like his fellow astroturfers at Americans for Prosperity, American Solutions, and FreedomWorks, O’Hara is misrepresenting the extent to which his employer, the Heartland Institute, has been involved in helping organize today’s protests. Earlier this week, O’Hara himself issued a press release bragging about how Heartland was “the first organization on board for the first tea parties” and has been “integrally involved in the April 15th Tax Day Tea Party here in Chicago.” Heartland promoted the protests on their homepage today.

Climate Progress

Has the IPCC rendered itself irrelevant?

If you go to the homepage of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, you will find at the top one of the most amazing statements ever issued by that body:

The IPCC is currently starting to outline its Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) which will be finalized in 2014.

2014?  How useless is that?

While glacial change may no longer be an apt term for what is actually happening to the world’s glaciers, it is an ironically apt term for what has happened to the IPCC.

Originally the assessments of the state of understanding of the science were going to be every 5 years, then that slid to every 6 years, and now we are apparently at 7 years between reports.

The Fourth Assessment should have been sufficient to jumpstart serious action (see “Absolute MUST Read IPCC Report: Debate over, further delay fatal, action not costly“).  But it ended up be out of date the minute the ink was dry for several reasons:

Read more

Politics

Fox News’s ‘coverage’ of tea parties: 23 segments, 73 on-air promos in eight days.

As ThinkProgress has documented, Fox News has aggressively promoted today’s conservative, anti-Obama tea parties. A Media Matters analysis found that Fox dedicated 23 separate segments to the tea parties between April 6 and April 13; it aired at least 73 in-show and commercial promotions for the parties as well. Of all the Fox programs, Neil Cavuto’s “Your World” dedicated the most time to the tea parties:

mmfa-fox.png

See Media Matters’s full findings, including an analysis of Fox’s weekend programs, here.

Politics

Gov. Rick Perry: Texas might have to secede.

perry-finger1.jpgGov. Rick Perry (R-TX) was one of the dozens of Republican lawmakers who are addressing the anti-Obama tea parties today. He told the crowd he didn’t believe they were all “right-wing extremists,” as others had sought to portray them. “But if you are, I’m with you!” he shouted. After, he told reporters that Texas might have to secede from the union:

Perry told reporters following his speech that Texans might get so frustrated with the government they would want to secede from the union.

“There’s absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that.”

Earlier this week, Perry signed onto a nonbinding resolution claiming the federal government had overstepped its Constitutional authority. “I believe the federal government has become oppressive. I believe it’s become oppressive in its size, its intrusion into the lives of its citizens, and its interference with the affairs of our state,” Perry declared.

Health

What Do Private Insurers Do With Your Money?

Today, CNBC featured a debate between Kerry Weems, former acting director of CMS and former U.S. assistant secretary of health, and CAPAF Senior Fellow Judy Feder about the role of administrative costs in health care.

Weems, who wrote about the subject in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal, reiterated his argument that “the administrative expenses of private insurance plans represent money well spent for their members”:

Watch it:

Weems’ claims are specious at best. The rapid increase in premiums and corresponding spike in insurer profits — between 1999 and 2008, premiums have increased 117 percent for families, while the profits of the top 10 insurance companies increased by approximately 1000% — diminishes any notion that for-profit insurance companies are using their administrative dollars to negotiate for lower prices. As Feder pointed out, “the insurance industry has gotten more and more concentrated, they’re not competing. In almost every market one or a couple of insurance plans dominate and rather than making health care work for us and getting consumers good deals, what they’re doing is taking higher prices charged by hospitals, passing that onto consumers and even above that, increasing their profits.”

A more thorough debunk is available here, but one point bears mentioning. Weems claimed that Medicare does little to stamp out fraud. But as acting director of CMS, Weems himself implemented new anti-fraud measures, noting in one speech that “over the years, we’ve been able to save beneficiaries and taxpayers billions of dollars. However, we need to do more. Even one dollar paid to fraud is too much. CMS is working overtime to make sure that fraudsters will not find an easy mark in Medicare.”

Yglesias

Israel Refuses to Cooperate With UN Human Rights Inquiry

goldstone_0.jpg

The Israeli incursion into the Gaza Strip produced various allegations of human rights abuses on the part of the IDF and naturally there are counter-allegations against Hamas. The UN Human Rights Council decided, sensibly, to do an investigation into these allegations. And they decided, cleverly, to ask South African judge Richard Goldstone to head it up. Goldstone is highly credible, widely respected, an expert on international humanitarian law. And he’s Jewish, so it would be hard to label any criticisms he might make of Israeli conduct as motivated by antisemitism.

Unfortunately, Mark Goldberg reports that Israel has decided not to cooperate with the investigation.

I think this is a serious mistake. As Mark says, it’s only going to lead outside observers to the conclusion that Israel feels it has something to hide. The IDF leadership and Israeli politicians have loudly proclaimed that IDF conduct was of sterling-pure morality. But in the real world, the way you know an organization takes an issue seriously is that they make a serious effort at monitoring. If the IDF were really “the most moral in the world” it would be eager to participate in this sort of exercise, not just to clear its name but because the way you achieve moral conduct is precisely by rigorously investigating allegations of misconduct. By trying to shout down or block out efforts to inquiry, all the Israeli government is doing is signaling both to outsiders and to insiders that they don’t genuinely take these concerns seriously.

Politics

Armitage: I should have resigned because of torture.

In an interview to be aired on Thursday, former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage told Al Jazeera English that he “did not know…that torture was going on” in the Bush administration. In retrospect, if he knew about the mistreatment, Armitage said he would have resigned:

armitage12.jpgQ: So when you knew that the administration of which you were a part was departing from the Geneva Conventions and sidelining them, why didn’t you quit?

ARMITAGE: In hindsight maybe I should’ve. But in those positions you see how many more battles you have. You maybe fool yourself. You say how much worse would x, y, or z be if I weren’t here trying to do it? So torture is a matter of principle as far as I’m concerned. I hope, had I known about it at the time I was serving, I would’ve had the courage to resign.

Armitage has previously been waterboarded as part of SERE training, saying in 2008 that he “absolutely” believes the practice is torture. “I’m ashamed that we’re even having this discussion,” he said of the debate over torture.

Yglesias

Do We Need a Mexico Lobby? Should We Fear One?

mexico_flagthumbnail.jpg

Yesterday, someone asked what I thought of this post at the Latino Politics Blog calling for the creation of a “Mexico lobby” along the lines of the Israel lobby or the Cuba lobby. My first thought, of course, is that the author of the piece is a raging anti-semite as is everyone who thinks that the US-Israeli relationship is the result of domestic ethnic lobbying efforts rather than an exquisitely rational calculus of American national interests.

Joking aside, I think the issue here is that the Mexican-American population is probably too big to support a cohesive “lobby” pushing a very specific agenda. Beyond that, the US-Mexican relationship is already very close. Our countries are adjacent to one another, have very integrated markets in most goods and services, and obviously there’s a lot of flow of people across the boarder. This means that the main issues on the US-Mexico bilateral agenda—NAFTA and immigration—are both big time issues in American politics writ large. They’re not under-the-radar things that are amenable to narrow lobbying. The result is that Mexican-American participation in these issues, though both quite influential and quite real, has a totally different flavor from efforts to court Cuban or Jewish voters or donors through appeals related to Cuba policy or Israel policy.

Climate Progress

Green Jobs Act Co-Author Establishes Green Jobs Caucus

Green Jobs NowRep. John Tierney (D-MA), co-author of the Green Jobs Act, has announced the creation of the Green Jobs Caucus to support this “essential component of our country’s economic recovery.” In 2007, Rep. Hilda Solis (D-CA) and Tierney wrote the act to authorize “quality job training programs in the renewable energy and energy efficiency fields.” It was passed into law as part of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. Funding for green jobs training followed the election of President Obama, who designated Rep. Solis as his Secretary of Labor. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, signed into law on February 17, 2009, appropriates $500 million for green job training.

Secretary Solis applauded the formation of the Green Jobs Caucus:

Training American workers in the renewable energy and energy-efficiency industries will provide economic security for our middle-class families while reducing our nation’s dependence on foreign fossil fuels. I was pleased to author the Green Jobs Act with Congressman Tierney, and I believe the Green Jobs Caucus can play an important role in Congress.

Founding members of the Green Jobs Caucus joining Rep. Tierney include Phil Hare (D-IL), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Doris Matsui (D-CA), Jim McGovern (D-MA), and Henry Waxman (C-CA).

The Green Jobs Caucus is the second green economy caucus announced for the 111th Congress, joining the Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition, led by Jay Inslee (D-WA) and Steve Israel (D-NY).

Older

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up