The White House is desperate to change the name of Bush’s warrantless domestic surveillance program. The White House wants people to call it a “terrorist surveillance program.” The press office even released a handy fact sheet:

Domestic Calls are calls inside the United States. International Calls are calls either to or from the United States.

Domestic Flights are flights from one American city to another. International Flights are flights to or from the United States.

Domestic Mail consists of letters and packages sent within the United States. International Mail consists of letters and packages sent to or from the United States.

Domestic Commerce involves business within the United States. International Commerce involves business between the United States and other countries.

It’s good to know that the White House knows the difference between a domestic flight and an international flight. But it’s completely irrelevant. (Afterall, the White House isn’t asking people to call it an “international surveillance program.”)

The program should have a name to accurately describe it. A combination of two things distinguish this program from all other legal surveillance programs:

1. It was conducted without a warrant. (Warrantless)
2. It involved people on U.S. soil. (Domestic)

If this wasn’t a warrantless domestic surveillance program it wouldn’t be a story. A “terrorist surveillance program” is not descriptive. It could be referring to any number of programs, many of which have been around for decades and are not at all controversial.

Journalists are supposed to describe stories as accurately as possible. Any journalist who uses the label “terrorist surveillance program” isn’t doing their job.

[ED. UPDATE: Sen. Daschle will be stopping by a little later to respond to your comments. Sen. Daschle got tied up today, but we are going to reschedule a time soon for him to answer your questions on this topic.]

We face a major crisis in this nation. Our health system is collapsing. We now spend a record-high 16 percent of our economy on health care. Premiums have risen by 73 percent since 2000. And businesses now spend nearly $450 billion on health benefits – not counting their Medicare payroll taxes. In a few short years, the health costs of Fortune 500 companies will exceed their profits. Despite these costs, the U.S. ranks 34th on life expectancy, 41st in infant mortality, and 37th, according to the World Health Organization, in health system performance. In short, we need fundamental change.

The problem is not a lack of ideas. It is a lack of leadership. The only answer that the President has to this crisis is so-called consumer-driven health care. This means shifting costs to people through high deductibles, and shifting risk and responsibility to patients.

This is a bad idea for three reasons:

1. It makes the wrong assumptions about health care. A person with chest pain is not in a position to decide on which tests to take and what drugs he needs. A $1,000 deductible is not going to make a person switch hospitals to get an extra hour of hospital care, which is all that the deductible can buy. Health care is not a commodity. When we buy a car, we don’t want to have the parts dropped off on our front lawns. Consumer-driven care just doesn’t make sense for health care.

2. It assumes that individuals can go up against industry and win. Look at the Medicare drug benefit. My mother has to choose from 73 plans. It is impossible for her to figure out which has the lowest prices. Rather than pooling the purchasing power of seniors to leverage lower prices, this drug benefit allows for drug companies to charge higher prices and insurers to profit. So, if you like the Medicare drug benefit, you will love consumer-directed health care.

Read more

The Justice Department argued in July 2002 that a “reasonable suspicion” standard would not “pass constitutional muster” — the very standard they’re trying to employ now.

20 states have had to step up and cover prescription drug costs for millions of Medicare beneficiaries who were denied life-saving medications because of glitches in the administration’s new Medicare plan.

Medicare administrator Mark McClellan originally refused to reimburse the states, claiming the federal government didn’t have the authority to do so:

Under this program, we don’t have the authority to pay states directly. People are in Medicare drug plans, and it’s the Medicare plans that are supposed to pay for the medications.

Legislators in both the House and the Senate offered to help the states and introduce legislation that “gives the federal government the authority to reimburse states.”

But it ends up the administration had the authority all along. McClellan has backtracked, now saying no legislation is necessary: “This can start right away. We don’t need legislation.”

Caught in another bogus excuse.

For nearly 2 months after Mike Brown was forced to resign from FEMA for his incompetent response to Hurricane Katrina, he continued to collect his full $148,000 salary as a “consultant.” Why was Brown retained? According to a FEMA spokeswoman, it was so he could fully cooperate with the investigations into what went wrong:

FEMA spokeswoman Nicol Andrews confirmed that Brown is still on FEMA’s payroll as a consultant. She said he works from home, where he is “pulling all the documentation together” to aid in the investigations into the government’s response to Katrina.

Now that Brown has cashed his checks, he is refusing to cooperate with the Senate investigation:

While FEMA has been helpful, Mike Brown — the former FEMA director who resigned amid intense criticism of his agency’s response — has refused to answer even the simplest questions, [Sen. Joe] Lieberman added.

Brown continues to talk about the issue, but only for a fee. He recently keynoted a storm response conference and provided “insight and perspective on Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.” Senators investigating the issue could have attended for the low price of $375.

“And yet we have brave men and women who are willing to step forward because they know what’s at stake. They’re willing to sacrifice their lives for this great country. What I am asking all of you tonight, is not to put on a uniform. Put on a bumper sticker. Is it that much to ask? Is it that much to ask to step up and serve your country, to fight for what we believe in.” Video here.

“Stretched by frequent troop rotations to Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army has become a “thin green line” that could snap unless relief comes soon, according to a study for the Pentagon.”