ThinkProgress Logo

Politics

House subcommittee subpoenas Feith.

By Amanda Terkel on Jun 24, 2008 at 4:58 pm

Last week, former undersecretary of defense Doug Feith was scheduled to testify before a House Judiciary subcommittee, but he refused to appear at the last minute to avoid testifying alongside Colin Powell’s former chief of staff, Lawrence Wilkerson. Today, the subcommittee issued a subpoena to compel Feith’s testimony:

“While most witnesses with relevant information appear before Congress voluntarily, in some cases, it is necessary to compel their testimony,” said Rep. Nadler. “It is simply not prudent to rely on the voluntary promise to appear of a witness who already has broken such an agreement. I hope that it will not become necessary to issue this subpoena, but Congress has the prerogative and duty to conduct meaningful oversight to ensure a robust system of checks and balances.”

Health

Nagourney: McCain’s Health Care Proposal ‘Is In Many Ways Similar To What Bush Has Proposed’

By Igor Volsky on Jun 24, 2008 at 4:52 pm

During an appearance on MSNBC today, veteran New York Times reporter Adam Nagourney suggested that Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) health care proposal represented an extension of President Bush’s failed health-care reforms:

I think politically the issue that John McCain has to be careful about is that Democrats will be able to use his proposal on health care as another way of presenting him as Bush III because his proposal is in many ways similar to what President Bush has proposed.

Indeed, the Wonk Room has long argued that McCain’s plan, like Bush’s failed initiative, pushes Americans into the individual and insurance market-place and places 158 million Americans who currently receive their health insurance through an employer, in jeopardy. Today, Elizabeth Edwards, a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress, outlined the dangers of McCain’s approach:

Senator McCain’s never been in the individual market, he doesn’t know how difficult it is, in fact how impossible it is, if you happen to be one of the unlucky Americans who has a preexisting condition. He does, Senator McCain does. I do. Among the people who are employed right now and getting their insurance that way, fifty six million of them do, and they’re going to find it incredibly expensive, if it’s available at all, for those people who have preexisting conditions.

Watch It:


Also appearing on MSNBC, former Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA) attempted to take credit for the success of Massachusetts’ health reform while simultaneously promoting McCain’s regressive prescription. Calling the Massachusetts reform “a great model,” Romney argued that Americans should not adopt it:

Well, I like what we did in Massachusetts, for Massachusetts…but John McCain has endorsed the plan of letting each state craft their plans to get people insured and to make sure that issues like preexisting condition are covered. We did it in our way.

Fortunately, most Americans support universal health insurance and reject Bush’s and McCain’s radcial health care policies.

Politics

Justice Department report shows overwhelming Federalist Society bias.

By Satyam Khanna on Jun 24, 2008 at 4:23 pm

As ThinkProgress has noted, the Bush administration has extremely close ties to the Federalist Society. Political appointees in the Justice Department, such as Monica Goodling, assessed U.S. attorneys partly based on whether they were members of the right-wing group. In its new report, the DOJ Inspector General reveals that the Department’s internship and Honors programs were also heavily pro-Federalist Society:

dojchart.gif

In the Honors program, all seven applicants who indicated that they were American Constitution Society (ACS) members weren’t selected for interviews, while 27 of the 29 Federalist Society applicants were selected. In the Summer Law Internship Program (SLIP), 12 of the 13 applicants who were ACS members weren’t selected for interviews, while all Federalist Society applicants were approved.

Update

It wasn’t just ACS. WSJ Law blog notes, “Membership in liberal organizations like the American Constitution Society, Greenpeace, or the Poverty and Race Research Action Council were also seen as negative marks.”

Yglesias

Long Way Down

By ThinkProgress on Jun 24, 2008 at 4:22 pm

A new study from Harvard’s Joint Center for Housing Studies says the U.S. housing market is likely to keep slumping for a long time. Here’s coverage from the Washington Post. That makes sense to me — to have a speedy turnaround, you’d really need to have a speedy crash and that goes against the psychology of the whole enterprise. I believe the way these things usually work is that nominal prices stagnated for a while, allowing real prices to fall (and especially allowing real prices to fall as a share of household income) over time without people engaging in steep price cutting.

Politics

In a Fashion Reminiscent of Genghis Khan

By ThinkProgress on Jun 24, 2008 at 3:58 pm

On the advice of some readers I picked up Jack Weatherford’s Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World where I learned that Genghis Khan banned torture in his empire.

So, yes, under George W. Bush the United States of America is regressing to an understanding of humane treatment of people that doesn’t reflect the enlightened views of Genghis Khan. That’s your feel-good thought of the day.

Politics

Brownback: It’s Inappropriate To Want To Relocate Gitmo Inmates To Leavenworth, Unless You’re John McCain

By Satyam Khanna on Jun 24, 2008 at 3:37 pm

mccainbrwn.jpgYesterday, the Center for American Progress released a report advocating closing Guantanamo and relocating remaining detainees to the “Supermax” prison in Colorado or to the U.S. Military Detention Barracks at Ft. Leavenworth, KS.

Soon after, Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) sent out a press release attacking the report, calling it “misleading and inaccurate.” “Fort Leavenworth has neither the space nor the security arrangements to handle detainees from Guantanamo Bay,” he said, criticizing advocates of this position:

I am disappointed that policy makers and analysts continue to talk about Fort Leavenworth as a place to house detainees without visiting the facility. In person visits will confirm why the Disciplinary Barracks do not meet the security requirements necessary to perform this mission, even if Guantanamo Bay were to close.

But an outspoken advocate of relocating Guantanamo detainees to Ft. Leavenworth is Sen. John McCain (R-AZ). In his statement, Brownback — who says he would be “honored” to be McCain’s vice president — left out any mention of McCain’s stance on the issue. McCain, in fact, has long supported relocating all Gitmo detainees to Ft. Leavenworth:

– Q: How would you fight the War on Terror differently than it’s being fought now?
McCAIN: I would probably announce the closing of Guantanamo Bay. I would move those detainees to Fort Leavenworth. I would announce we will not torture anyone. [4/29/07]

– McCAIN: I would immediately close Guantanamo Bay, move all the prisoners to Fort Leavenworth and truly expedite the judicial proceedings in their cases. [3/18/07]

But after McCain made these statements, Brownback’s office did not level similar attacks at him. In April, Brownback wrote an op-ed titled, “Don’t put detainees at Ft. Leavenworth” criticizing an article stating Ft. Leavenworth “could work” for detainees. “If the goal is improving America’s security, Ft. Leavenworth is not the solution,” he said. Not surprisingly, Brownback didn’t mention McCain in that op-ed either.

As former Navy general counsel Alberto Mora explained last week, keeping Guantanamo open is a grave security risk, as it, along with Abu Ghraib, are “the first and second identifiable causes of U.S. combat deaths in Iraq.” At the Wonk Room, Ken Gude explains why Ft. Leavenworth “could safely and securely imprison” the Guantanamo detainees.

Yglesias

By Request: Density and Intercity Rail

By ThinkProgress on Jun 24, 2008 at 3:21 pm

Nicholas Beaudrot asks:

Are American metropolitan areas outside of the Northeast Corridor dense enough or well layed out enough to support inter-city rail? Beyond putting light- or medium-rail in those cities, how much would have to change before inter-city rail made sense as a way to travel from, say, Milwaukee to Indianapolis?

As a general matter, rail works better as an alternative to driving when the destination is someplace with a good walking/transit network. That said, for a lot of trips it’s not really necessary to have a car at your destination even if your destination is a very car-dependent area. I went to Forth Worth for a conference once and both the hotel and the convention center are in Fort Worth’s smallish walkable downtown. Combined with a cab ride to the Fort Worth Cultural District to see the Kimbell Museum and the Fort Worth Modern that contained plenty of things to do for a few days without the expense of renting a car and that kind of thing is reasonably common for business travel.

Second rail is not only an alternative to driving, but also an alternative to flying. There are a lot of flights between Portland and Seattle, for example or between Chicago and Detroit. Any time you have two cities that are pretty close by and serviced by a lot of flights, you have a situation where a good inter-city rail option would attract customers notwithstanding any issues related to the density of the destination city. Replacing air trips with train trips is good for the environment, and any time you have a viable rail option that’ll displace some of the intercity car travel which is also good. Meanwhile, a passenger rail hub can become a focal point for neighborhood development and a node on a growing urban transit network.

Security

Not Ft. Leavenworth?

By Guest Blogger on Jun 24, 2008 at 2:38 pm

Our guest blogger is Ken Gude, Associate Director of the International Rights and Responsibility Program at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

sb.JPGHow to close Guantanamo is a very challenging and emotive issue that draws on the memories of 9/11 and justifiable anxieties about future terrorist attacks. One aspect of this saga that deserves to be addressed with rational analysis is the concern that locating some of the Guantanamo detainees within the territorial boundaries of the United States for incarceration is a dangerous risk that could pave the way for terrorist attacks on the homeland.

In my report released yesterday, I recommend that the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, among a few other possible locations, could imprison a small number of the Guantanamo detainees. Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS), reacted swiftly and harshly to that prospect, describing my analysis as “misleading and inaccurate” and asserting that “Fort Leavenworth has neither the space nor the security arrangements to handle detainees from Guantanamo Bay.”

This statement seems at odds with Ft. Leavenworth’s mission and “Can Do” motto. The Disciplinary Barracks is the only maximum security facility in the entire military prison system. While the old prison at Ft. Leavenworth was commonly referred to as “the Castle,” that stone and brick facility was replaced in 2002 by a “new state-of-the-art, 515-bed” detention center complete with a special housing unit for maximum security prisoners. The maximum security wing is isolated from the rest of the facility, three guards are assigned to each inmate, and every inch of the prison is covered by video surveillance.

Another possible location I identify is the brig at the Naval Base in Charleston, South Carolina. Although it is only a medium security facility, it has already been the home of designated enemy combatants Jose Padilla and Yasser Hamdi, and currently holds Ali Al-Marri. If Charleston, a lower security level facility, can accomplish that mission, it seems logical that Ft. Leavenworth could safely and securely imprison some of the Guantanamo detainees.

The number of detainees at issue here is relatively small, in the neighborhood of 50 detainees with the majority of those ending up at the “supermax” penitentiary in Florence, Colorado. Sen. Brownback clearly believes that Ft. Leavenworth can not handle even a small number of Guantanamo detainees. He should know then, that the candidate he enthusiastically endorsed for president of the United States, Senator John McCain, has repeatedly pledged that he would close Guantanamo and move all of the approximately 270 remaining detainees to Ft. Leavenworth. Read more

Culture

DC for Obama Located

By ThinkProgress on Jun 24, 2008 at 2:34 pm

2008_0624_dcforobama.jpg

Intrepid commenter Alex on this very site cracked the code that revealed the DC for Obama t-shirt that DCist had previously reported did not exist. Now they say “The shirt still isn’t included on the main state shirt page of the Obama online store, however. Should we have been able to figure out that it was hidden there all along? Perhaps. Should we have had to? At the very least, it’s sloppy web design.”

So be that as it may, my friends, that’s still not change you can believe in [hideous scowl]. John McCain could design a better page and he doesn’t even know how to use a computer.

Older

Newer

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

Sign Up