Political Hot Topics
|
|
A “DISGRACEFUL” ACT THAT DOES “GREAT HARM” TO THE NATION: President Bush offered an impassioned defense of his secret international banking surveillance program yesterday, calling it a legal and effective tool for hunting down terrorists and denouncing the media’s disclosure of it as a “disgraceful” act that does “great harm” to the nation. The president used a White House appearance with supporters of troops in Iraq to lash out at newspapers that revealed the program, which has examined hundreds of thousands of private banking records from around the world. His remarks led off a broader White House assault later amplified by Vice President Cheney and Treasury Secretary John W. Snow. Washington Post: Surveillance Disclosure Denounced BUSH APPROVAL UP IN NEW POST-ABC POLL: President Bush’s approval rating rebounded from its lowest point a month ago and now stands at 38 percent. That is five points higher than it was in May, though still weak enough to cause Republicans to worry about their electoral chances in November. But the survey offered some hopeful signs for Bush and the Republicans as they prepare for the midterm elections. The big advantage that Democrats held on virtually every major issue has narrowed or reversed. On the question of which party is best able to handle the situation in Iraq, the Democrats’ 14-point advantage in last month’s Post-ABC poll has been cut in half; they now have a 47 percent lead over Republicans’ 41 percent. Washington Post: Nation Is Divided on Drawdown Of Troops WILL IRAQ’S NEW GOVT. NEGOTIATE WITH INSURGENTS? Several Sunni-led insurgent groups have approached the Iraqi government to try to start negotiations after the Iraqi prime minister’s presentation on Sunday of a limited plan for reconciliation, a senior legislator from the prime minister’s party said Monday. The groups have made no demands yet, but wanted to express their views to top government officials, said the legislator, Hassan al-Suneid. “There are signals” from “some armed groups to sit at the negotiating table,” said Mr. Suneid, who, like the prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, belongs to the Islamic Dawa Party, a conservative Shiite group. New York Times: Some Insurgents Are Asking Iraq for Negotiations TO PASS IMMIGRATION BILL THIS YEAR, BUSH HAS “GOT TO GET INVOLVED”: The security of the border should be the No. 1 priority for an immigration bill, Sen. Arlen Specter said yesterday, and he’s open to a compromise that sets goals for border and interior enforcement ahead of a guest-worker program and path to citizenship for illegal aliens. The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said that in order for Congress to produce an immigration bill this year, President Bush must lobby personally on specific details in the bill — something he has not done. “The president’s got to be there. He’s got to get involved, in my opinion, in the negotiations. Now, he has not yet been willing to do that,” the Pennsylvania Republican told editors and reporters at The Washington Times. Washington Times: Specter puts borders first HEARING TODAY ON WHITE HOUSE “SIGNING STATEMENTS”: A bill becomes the rule of the land when Congress passes it and the president signs it into law, right? Not necessarily, according to the White House. A law is not binding when a president issues a separate statement saying he reserves the right to revise, interpret or disregard it on national security and constitutional grounds. That’s the argument a Bush administration official is expected to make Tuesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Arlen Specter, R-Pa., who has demanded a hearing on a practice he considers an example of the administration’s abuse of power. “It’s a challenge to the plain language of the Constitution,” Specter said in an interview with The Associated Press. “I’m interested to hear from the administration just what research they’ve done to lead them to the conclusion that they can cherry-pick.” AP via Yahoo! News: Bush ignores laws he inks, vexing Congress $2 BILLION IN “SCAMS, SCHEMES, AND STUPEFYING BUREAUCRATIC BUNGLES”: Among the many superlatives associated with Hurricane Katrina can now be added this one: it produced one of the most extraordinary displays of scams, schemes and stupefying bureaucratic bungles in modern history, costing taxpayers up to $2 billion. A hotel owner in Sugar Land, Tex., has been charged with submitting $232,000 in bills for phantom victims. And roughly 1,100 prison inmates across the Gulf Coast apparently collected more than $10 million in rental and disaster-relief assistance. There are the bureaucrats who ordered nearly half a billion dollars worth of mobile homes that are still empty, and renovations for a shelter at a former Alabama Army base that cost about $416,000 per evacuee. New York Times: ‘Breathtaking’ Waste and Fraud in Hurricane Aid SCOTUS STRIKES DOWN VERMONT’S STRICT CAMPAIGN LIMITS: The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday struck down keys parts of Vermont’s 1997 campaign finance law that sought to limit how much money state candidates can raise and spend on elections. The nine-member court was hardly unanimous — issuing six separate opinions in the case — but the end result is Vermont’s limits on campaign contributions are too low and limits on campaign spending restrict candidates’ right to free speech. One side hailed the decision as a victory for free speech. The other called it a sad day for democracy. “It’s not totally unexpected, but it’s disappointing,” said Vermont Attorney General Bill Sorrell, who argued in defense of the law before the court in February. Burlington Free Press: High Court Rejects Vermont’s Campaign Limits FLAG VOTE MAY COME TODAY: Culminating emotional debate on patriotism and individual rights in the age of terrorism, the Senate is preparing to vote as early as Tuesday on a constitutional amendment to ban the burning or desecration of the U.S. flag. It could become the first change to the Constitution approved by Congress in 35 years. Supporters and opponents said the count would be a cliffhanger, likely coming within one vote either way of the 67 needed for a two-thirds majority, which would send the amendment to the states. If the Senate joins the House in approving the amendment, ratification by three-fourths of the states (at least 38) appears likely because many have passed resolutions saying they would ratify it. Chicago Tribune: Senate expects close flag amendment vote |