ThinkProgress Logo

Justice

Obama Administration To Seek Citizenship Pathway For Immigrants

By Sy Mukherjee on Jan 13, 2013 at 12:53 pm

According to the New York Times, the Obama Administration will not back down on its calls for comprehensive immigration reform that addresses all aspects of the issue, including provisions for high-skilled workers, students, and a pathway to citizenship for immigrants who achieve legal status.

Bucking GOP calls for a piecemeal approach on the issue, the administration will insist on a holistic solution that includes the promise of citizenship in conjunction with punitive measures against undocumented immigrants, according to administration officials:

The president and Democrats will also oppose measures that do not allow immigrants who gain legal status to become American citizens one day, the officials said. [...]

Mr. Obama is expected to lay out his plan in the coming weeks, perhaps in his State of the Union address early next month, administration officials said. The White House will argue that its solution for illegal immigrants is not an amnesty, as many critics insist, because it would include fines, the payment of back taxes and other hurdles for illegal immigrants who would obtain legal status, the officials said.

The president’s plan would also impose nationwide verification of legal status for all newly hired workers; add visas to relieve backlogs and allow highly skilled immigrants to stay; and create some form of guest-worker program to bring in low-wage immigrants in the future.

Since President Obama won his decisive re-election with a staggering 75 percent of the Latino vote, conservatives have been undergoing a collective epiphany on the status of their relationship with the Latino community. Influential Republicans such as Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Colin Powell have called out the contemporary GOP on its borderline xenophobia and asserted that, barring significant changes, it will not be able to attract support from one of America’s fastest-growing demographics.

Still, that hasn’t stopped some Republicans — such as Rep. Steve King (R-IA) — from pursuing extremist policies such as an unconstitutional ban on birthright citizenship.

Climate Progress

New York Times Widely Cricitized For Dismantling Its Environment Desk, Eliminating Editorial Positions

By Joe Romm on Jan 13, 2013 at 12:34 pm

“Keeping Environmental Reporting Strong Won’t Be Easy,” Warns Public Editor

The New York Times will close its environment desk in the next few weeks and assign its seven reporters and two editors to other departments. The positions of environment editor and deputy environment editor are being eliminated.

InsideClimate News reported in their Friday scoop that the Times insists this won’t affect coverage. But I’m very skeptical, as are a great many others, judging by comments echoing through the blogosphere, twitter, and my inbox.

For instance, the award-winning journalist Peter Dykstra — a 17-year veteran of CNN now publishing the Daily Climate — sent me this note sharing his too-relevant experience:

It’s far from a precise match for our situation at CNN four years ago — we all got fired, not re-shuffled.  And of course, CNN will never be confused with the Times. But CNN similarly assured everyone that coverage would not be affected. One area where a decision like this would likely have the same impact at the Times that it did at CNN:  When you abolish a standalone beat, it sends a strong message to every career-conscious reporter and editor that chasing environment stories is not a path to advancement.

Anyone who follows climate science, solutions, and politics knows that climate change is in the process of emerging as the story of the century — and that’s only if every major country pulls together to rapidly transform the global economy to avoid catastrophe. If the climate silence and inaction continues, it may well be the story of the millennium — see NOAA: Climate change “largely irreversible for 1000 years,” with permanent Dust Bowls in Southwest and around the globe.

So I also think that, as the still-influential “paper of record,” it sends a very bad message to the rest of the media. That was a point Dr. Robert J. Brulle of Drexel University, whom the NYT quoted last year as “an expert on environmental communications,” made in an email:

The decision by the New York Times to close its environmental desk accelerates the disappearance of climate change from our public discourse.  Over the past year, the Obama Administration has been silent on the topic, and we have just had a Presidential campaign in which climate change was never discussed.  Now the Times is closing its environmental desk.  Despite their official statements to the contrary, this move will reduce the paper’s institutional focus and capacity to report on environmental issues.

Media coverage of climate change has an enormous impact on both public opinion and the policy agenda.  As the leading U.S. paper, the New York Times also influences the rest of the media.  This act sends an important message that environmental issues no longer justify a special institutional focus. We can only hope that the other news media do not follow the Times’ “lead” in abdicating their responsibility to environmental reporting.

Nobody is terribly happy about this, but some are considerably more unhappy than others. The paper’s public editor has a long column headlined, “Keeping Environmental Reporting Strong Won’t Be Easy.” She quotes a wide range of opinions and concludes:

Read more

Security

GOP Senator Now Questions Hagel’s ‘Temperament’

By Rebecca Leber on Jan 13, 2013 at 12:29 pm

Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN)

Former GOP Sen. Chuck Hagel received bipartisan support after President Obama nominated him for Secretary of Defense last week. Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN), who served with Hagel on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, also praised him as someone he is “very open to” for the nomination: “Certainly his name coming forward is one I’m very open to. I had good relations with him while he was in the Senate.”

But this Sunday, during an appearance on This Week, Corker echoed the criticism of the smear campaign against Hagel, and raised vague concerns about his “temperament”:

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS (HOST): You had some positive things to say about Senator Hagel when his name was first floated. You said he had a good relations on the Senate foreign realtions committee. Do you see anything that should disqualify him fromt he Pentagon post?

CORKER: Well I think like a lot of people the hearings are going to have a huge effect on me [...] You know, I have a lot of questions about just this whole nuclear posture abuse. Those are things that haven’t been discussed yet. Obviously people have concerns about his stance towards Iran and Israel. But I think another thing, George, that’s going to come up is just his overall temperament, and is he suited to run a department or big agency or a big entity like the Pentagon.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Do you have questions about his temperament?

CORKER: I think there are a number of staffers who are coming forth no just talking about the way he has dealt with them. I certainly have quesitons about a lot of things.

Following Hagel’s nomination, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, former Secretary of State Gen. Colin Powell, and former top U.S. ambassador Ryan Crocker all announced their support. And despite the noise from the right, there is little evidence Hagel’s confirmation is in question.

Justice

NRA President: Americans Are Buying Firearms Because They Fear Obama

By Amanda Peterson Beadle on Jan 13, 2013 at 11:44 am

Gun sales skyrocketed at the end of 2012 after the tragic shootings in Newtown, Connecticut. The FBI conductedmore than 2 million criminal background checks ahead of gun purchases in December, according to the National Sports Shooting Association, representing a 58.6 percent increase over December 2011.

The National Rifle Association usually encourages Americans to purchase guns in the aftermath of an attack by spreading rumors of Democrats’ supposed efforts to restrict gun ownership. For instance, the NRA’s CEO and executive vice president Wayne LaPierre once warned that Obama would confiscate “our firearms” and undermine America’s greatness. But on CNN’s State Of The Union Sunday, NRA President David Keene dismissed charges that the organization’s fearmongering is responsible for the spike in sales fand instead blamed President Obama and gun safety proponent Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA):

CANDY CROWLEY (HOST): The accusation is that you are ginning up this conversation because it helps gun sales.

KEENE: The two people who are selling so-called assault rifles are Sen. Feinstein and President Obama, not us. They’re the ones that are scaring American gun owners. It isn’t the NRA.

Watch it:

While Keene may think American gun owners fear stronger gun laws, like the proposals that Vice President Biden’s gun violence prevention task force will likely release this week, even NRA members overwhelmingly support common-sense measures.

Keene dismissed policies that would limit the availability of assault weapons or high-capacity magazines, two proposals that are likely to be included in the recommendations of Vice President Joe Biden’s gun task force. “We don’t think any of those things work,” he said. “You should absolutely be able to compromise on things that accomplish the purpose. Our objection to those things is that they interfere with people’s rights without doing anything to solve the problem.” Biden is expected to send his report to the president on Tuesday.

Climate Progress

Ratsnakes May Join Bark Beetles, Jellyfish, Tropical Diseases, And Invasive Species As Winners In A Warming World

By Climate Guest Blogger on Jan 13, 2013 at 11:21 am

Who says there are no winners from climate change? “Global Warming is Doubling Bark Beetle Mating” and “The decline in creatures with shells could trigger an explosion in jellyfish populations” and “Climate change helps spread dengue fever in 28 states.” And of course “climate change will make invasive plants even more dominant in the landscape.” Here’s another possible winner. — JR

University of Illinois news release

URBANA – Speculation about how animals will respond to climate change due to global warming led University of Illinois researcher Patrick Weatherhead and his students to conduct a study of ratsnakes at three different latitudes—Ontario, Illinois, and Texas. His findings suggest that ratsnakes will be able to adapt to the higher temperatures by becoming more active at night.

“Ratsnakes are a species with a broad geographic range so we could use latitude as a surrogate for climate change,” Weatherhead said. “What are ratsnakes in Illinois going to be dealing with given the projections for how much warmer it will be 50 years from now? Well, go to Texas and find out. That’s what they’re dealing with now. Snakes are ectotherms, that is, they use the environment to regulate their body temperature. We were able to compare ratsnakes’ ability to regulate their temperature in Texas as compared to Illinois and Canada.”

The research showed that ratsnakes in Canada, Illinois, and Texas would all benefit from global warming. “It would actually make the environment thermally better for them,” Weatherhead said. “Texas is already too hot for much of the day so it may cause them to shift to even more nocturnal foraging there and stay active at night for more of the season.”

As the higher temperatures associated with global warming begin to be more challenging for snakes in Illinois, will they be able to switch to nocturnal foraging? “We think that won’t be a problem for them,” Weatherhead said. “We already know that Illinois snakes show some limited amount of nocturnal activity because there is anecdotal evidence for nocturnal nest predation by snakes.”

Read more

Politics

Colin Powell Calls Out The GOP’s Racism Problem: There Is ‘A Dark Vein Of Intolerance’

By Igor Volsky on Jan 13, 2013 at 11:16 am

On Sunday, during an appearance on Meet The Press, Colin Powell condemned the GOP’s “dark vein of intolerance” and the party’s repeated use of racial code words to oppose President Obama and rally white conservative voters.

Without mentioning names, Powell singled out former Mitt Romney surrogate and New Hampshire Gov. John Sununu for calling Obama “lazy” and Sarah Palin, who, Powell charged, used slavery-era terms to describe Obama:

POWELL: There’s also a dark — a dark vein of intolerance in some parts of the party. What do I mean by that? I mean by that that they still sort of look down on minorities. How can I evidence that?

When I see a former governor say that the President is “shuckin’ and jivin’,” that’s racial era slave term. When I see another former governor after the president’s first debate where he didn’t do very well, says that the president was lazy. He didn’t say he was slow. He was tired. He didn’t do well. He said he was lazy. Now, it may not mean anything to most Americans, but to those of us who are African Americans, the second word is shiftless and then there’s a third word that goes along with that. The birther, the whole birther movement. Why do senior Republican leaders tolerate this kind of discussion within the party?

Watch it:

Powell added that the Republican Party is “having an identity problem,” noting that its significant shift to the right has produced “two losing presidential campaigns.” “I think what the Republican Party needs to do now is a very hard look at itself and understand that the country is changed,” he said. “If the Republican Party does not change along with that demographic, they a going to be in trouble.”

Powell also called on Republicans to focus on a more equitable and progressive economic policies that help middle and lower income Americans, as well as immigration reform. “Everybody wants to talk about who is going to be the candidate,” Powell said. “You better think first about what’s the party actually going to represent.”

Security

Think Tank President Rebukes Senior Fellow’s Claims That Chuck Hagel Is Anti-Semitic

By Ben Armbruster on Jan 13, 2013 at 11:06 am

Elliott Abrams

Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) president Richard Haass said on ABC’s This Week on Sunday that ad hominem attacks on Chuck Hagel, President Obama’s choice as the next Defense Secretary, are “over the line.”

In an effort to derail Hagel’s nomination, the Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol and the neocons have been trying to convince the public that Hagel is an “anti-Semite.” CFR Senior Fellow Elliott Abrams, a former Bush administration official who was convicted of charges related to the Iran-Contra scandal, claimed last week that Hagel “seems to have some kind of problem with Jews.” But Haass, Abrams’ boss, rebuked those charges and the tactics Abrams and his neocon allies are using:

HAASS: The only thing that should be relevant George I would say are his ability to run the Pentagon and his views on policy … Where I think people are going over the line is with an hominem attacks, questioning for example whether he is an anti-Semite. I’ve known Chuck Hagel for more than 20 years for what it’s worth, I think that’s proposterous. I also don’t think that has a place in the public space. We often ask, why aren’t public debates better, why aren’t sometimes the best people going into public life, but this is one of the reasons. … I really don’t think there is a legitimate place in American political life for ad hominem attacks. These are loaded words that are being cast about and I think they’re simply beyond the pale.

Watch the clip:

A Council spokesperson last week backed away from Abrams’ baseless attacks on Hagel, saying they don’t represent the views of the Council on Foreign Relations. But Haass has now formally criticized Abrams’ attacks.

Critics of Abrams for his anti-Hagel comments are now calling on him to apologize. “I hope that Abrams rethinks his position and apologizes to Hagel and welcomes a genuine debate, Council on Foreign Relations-style, about their policy differences,” Atlantic editor-at-large and New America Foundation Senior Fellow Steve Clemons said this week.

Justice

Fox News Host Shocked By Gun Advocate’s Claim That Background Checks Are A Waste Of Time

By Igor Volsky on Jan 13, 2013 at 10:49 am

Gun advocate Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners Of America, spoke out against expanding background checks for gun purchases during an appearance on Fox News Sunday, arguing that the proposal would provide Americans with a “false sense of security” and waste time. Instead, Pratt encouraged lawmakers to eliminate gun-free zones in schools and self defense.

The claim shocked host Chris Wallace, who pointed out that at least 40 percent of American gun sales occur without any screening. “What is wrong with the idea, if you get a gun whether you buy from a registered dealer or a private sale, that you have to go through background checks just in case, to find out whether somebody has one or has a mental health problem,” he asked:

WALLACE: So, let’s talk about universal background checks, because, I was surprised to find out…[that] in 40% of the sales there is no such screen on the person buying the gun. What is wrong with universal background checks?

PRATT: It is false security to think somehow we’ll spot problems when there’s really no way to spot these problems. Some of the most horrendous of the mass murders that have occurred recently including the one in Newtown would not have been stopped by a background check…And, so, to assume that this is going to be our firewall against…

WALLACE: I don’t think anybody is saying that it is a firewall. What is wrong with the idea, if you get a gun whether you buy from a registered dealer or a private sale, that you have to go through background checks just in case, to find out whether somebody has one or has a mental health problem?

PRATT: We are wasting our time and going in that direction when we should be talking about doing away with the gun-free zones which have been so convenient, such a magnet to those who would come and slaughter lots of people knowing no one will be legally able to defend themselves in these zones.

Watch it:

Under current federal law, licensed federal firearms dealers conduct background checks on gun purchasers to prevent dangerous individuals such as violent criminals or the mentally ill from obtaining weapons. Gun transfers, “private sellers” or transactions at gun shows or online are exempt from the requirement and as a result more than 6 million gun transfers are unscreened.

An overwhelming majority of the public and gun owners support requiring a criminal background check of every individual seeking to purchase a gun.

Security

GOP Senator Promotes Iranian Propaganda To Oppose Chuck Hagel

By Igor Volsky on Jan 13, 2013 at 9:49 am

This morning, during an appearance on Fox News Sunday, Republican Senator and rising party star Kelly Ayotte (NH) cited Iranian propaganda in explaining her opposition to President Obama’s nomination of Chuck Hagel for Secretary of Defense.

“I have not made up my mind,” Ayotte began, before warning that Hagel has not expressed sufficient commitment to using military force against Iran if it develops nuclear weapons. She then pointed to Iranian propaganda, noting that the country “reacted favorably” to his nomination:

AYOTTE: Iran, this week, kind of reacted favorably somewhat. There were statements that were favorable to his nomination, in fact, they said they were hopeful that with his nomination, they hoped that we would change our policies. What I want to make sure is that Iran is actually not hopeful, but they are fearful as a result of our nominee from a Secretary of Defense perspective, because I think that will cause them to stop marching toward acquiring a nuclear weapon, not hope that we’ll change our policies, they need to change their policies.

On Tuesday, the Iranians responded to the Hagel nomination and used it to take a backhanded slap at the United States, saying, “We hope there will be practical changes in American foreign policy and that Washington becomes respectful of the rights of nations.” Unfortunately, neo-conservatives — desperate to derail Hagel — jumped on the propaganda from Iran’s foreign ministry to make their case.

Hagel has warned against the consequences of war with Iran, but has stated that his position is “fully consistent with the policy of presidents for more than a decade of keeping all options on the table, including the use of military force, thereby increasing pressure on Iran while working toward a political solution.” As a senator, Hagel also voted in favor of several rounds of targeted sanctions against Iran including packages in 1998, 2000, and 2006.

Climate Progress

Will 2013 Continue The 7-Year Downward Trend In American Driving?

By Climate Guest Blogger on Jan 13, 2013 at 9:05 am

by Justin Horner, via NRDC’s Switchboard

Predictions and prognostications are the stuff of the New Year–and why should driving trends be any different?  Will 2013 see a continuation of what has now been a nearly 90 month drop in population-adjusted Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT)?

The safe answer, of course, is “well, we just don’t know” (or, “we just don’t know until Nate Silver takes the questions on”).  In fact, the most recent data from the Federal Highway Administration’s Traffic Volume Trends Report (October 2012) shows an uptick in total VMT of about 0.6% over October 2011, with small increases in every region of the country, save the Hurricane Sandy-impacted Northeast.

Yet, it is unlikely that many of the broader factors that have led to VMT declines stark enough to give birth to the notion of “peak car” will be changing in any significant way in 2013.   In November of last year, the International Transport Forum of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development held a round-table on Long-Run Trends in Travel Demand.   The panelists focused on just these demographic, behavioral and long-run economic factors, the trends that have the greatest impact on driving demand in the coming years.

True transpo geeks will want to read the reports for themselves, but I’ll outline some of the most interesting tidbits here.  First, some of what we would call “good news:”

  • Total US driving hit its peak in 2007. Since then, average annual VMT growth has been -0.5%, while average annual population growth has been 0.8%.  Per capita VMT in August 2012 was about the same as it was in 2004;
  • Obviously, certain age groups drive far less than others: kids can’t drive, working adults with families drive the most, and some seniors shouldn’t be driving at all (if you ask me).   In the coming years, then, as Boomers retire, they will drive less, and as Millennials enter their prime family and employment years, they’ll drive more.  Yet, at least in the early years of the 21st Century, we’re seeing that every age cohort drove fewer miles per capita in 2008 than they did in 2001;
  • Younger Americans (aged 16 to 34) have made even more significant changes in the way they travel.  Between 2001 and 2009, they cut their per capita VMT by 24%, took 16% more walk trips, 24% more bike trips, and travelled 40% more on public transit;
  • The number of licensed drivers in America is barely growing: Every age group under 50 has a smaller percentage of its population licensed in 2010 than in 1983. For the first time in American history, women with licenses outnumber men.  Women do drive less, drive more slowly and more safely (as if you needed me to tell you that).

Among the explanations for these changing driving patterns?

Read more

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

Sign Up