So What the Heck Are "Basic Human Rights"?
This post is part of Billy Hallowell and Stephen Nichols’ Static News project. For more information, please visit www.static-news.com.
“At its core, abortion is a human tragedy. To effect meaningful change, we must engage the debate at a human level.” - John McCain
For our first week we’ve decided to cover a really difficult topic: Human rights. While it seems like such a simple issue on the surface, it’s actually quite complex. To start, how does one even define human rights? Is it the basics — food, shelter, clothing — or does it go beyond those simple attributes? Furthermore, who is entitled to these “basic rights?” During the Saddleback forum with Rick Warren last Saturday, John McCain and Barack Obama answered the following question quite interestingly: “…at what point does a baby get human rights, in your view?” The disparities in their answers are mind boggling:
Obama: Well, you know, I think that whether you’re looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade.
McCain: At the moment of conception. (APPLAUSE). I have a 25-year pro-life record in the Congress, in the Senate. And as president of the United States, I will be a pro-life president. And this presidency will have pro-life policies. That’s my commitment. That’s my commitment to you.
Startling differences, no? Without too much partisan rhetoric let me just say that Obama’s answer is unacceptable for someone who is running for the American presidency. Either you’re pro-life or you’re pro-choice (and we all know that Obama is pro-choice). To his credit, Obama did publicly admit being pro-choice following the above statement. But, attempting to candy-coat the answer didn’t give anything of value to the American people. Anyway, let me get back to addressing “basic human rights.” While I believe wholeheartedly that human beings are entitled to suitable living conditions, food, clothing and all of the other amenities that we often under-appreciate when we have them here in America, I also believe that there are a plethora of other issues that fall under the “basic human rights” genre.
Civil rights. Abortion. Embryonic stem cell research. Access to healthcare. The breakdown of the American family unit. Education. Sure, these issues aren’t the most exciting conversational pieces, but as young Americans who are going to inherit a very broken world, it’s important that we’re prepared to confront each with open hearts and minds. In some way, each issue encompasses the notion of “basic human rights.” Dealing with these issues isn’t going to be easy, but trying to explain where the candidates stand is what Stephen and I are here to do (while inserting our own opinions along the way, of course).
On Abortion
John McCain — by his own words — believes that human life deserves basic rights at the moment of conception. There are plenty of pro-choicers out there who would (and have) vocally denounced statement like this. Agree with him or not, McCain was clear on his stance at the Saddleback forum and I couldn’t agree more. One of McCain’s campaign issues is “human dignity and the sanctity of life.” Allow me to better illustrate these ideals in his own (campaign’s) words:
He is absolutely right in his notion that the power should be returned to the states. Why is our federal government legislating what has often been slated as infanticide (when a baby’s life is terminated at five or six months, murder is the only descriptive that comes to mind)? Also:
These issues aren’t easy. No one is saying that we should judge women who decide to have an abortion (although I am opposed to abortion, itself), but there needs to be greater consideration for the child’s life — the baby’s basic human rights. At what point does a baby gain his or her individual rights? Weigh in and comment highlighting where you stand on the issue at hand.
Embryonic Stem Cell Research
(If you’re confused or thinking “what the heck is a stem cell,” be sure to read up on it (clue: it’s not plant-related). Check out Wikipedia’s easy-to-read description).
And then there is embryonic stem cells. Listen, this is a debate that can go on for hours. We’ll be discussing it on our radio show today at 6 p.m. EST. In the meantime, let me show you John McCain’s stance:
It’s pretty clear that McCain is open to stem cells (as we all should be), but relatively closed to embryonic stem cells (as we all should be). First off, one must recognize the differences between stem cell research and embryonic stem cell research. Conservatives don’t stand against the former, but we do take issue with the latter. Embryonic stems cells are being slated as the end all, cure-all but in reality, they are less viable than other types of stem cells. Creating life for spare parts is counterproductive and lacks respect for human life. Listen to our show for more in this, as we interview Carol Peterson — someone who knows firsthand about stem cells!
For the sake of brevity, I’m going to cut the conversation off there. Trust me, we’ll have plenty more to talk about in terms of education, healthcare and other human rights issues. Let’s take it one step at a time people!
Mindless Fans: The Obama Camp Unleashes Weak Counter Strategy
Aside from being utterly hilarious, John McCain’s portrayal of Barack Obama as a left-wing celebrity who has traits and a following that are comparable to Paris Hilton and Britney Spears fetched an extraordinary amount of media coverage. The campaign ad also nabbed the attention of one of its main characters: Paris Hilton. She quickly released a “counter” ad, offering a fun-filled response to McCain’s banter; the video went viral, reaching well over five million viewers.
With so much attention being diverted from Obama, his campaign is desperately seeking publicity. While he’s vacationing in Hawaii with his family, the campaign is working feverishly to chip away at John McCain’s credentials. Instead of coming up with their own innovative counter-attack, his staff members are simply regurgitating McCain’s “celeb” routine. Perplexed at the amount of media coverage McCain was able to garner and clearly annoyed with the “celebrity” taunts, the Obama campaign is shooting back:
Aside from the fact that the “third-term” rant is getting old, the Obama campaign continues to mislead voters into believing that McCain agrees wholeheartedly with Bush’s polities. The fact of the matter is that McCain differs greatly when considering a number of domestic and international policy issues. Furthermore, wouldn’t it make sense that McCain would agree with Bush on some issues? McCain and Bush are both Republicans, no? Obama agrees with the boilerplate ultra-liberal selling points: universal healthcare, no offshore drilling, higher taxes for pretty much everyone — so why shouldn’t McCain share in some of the more conservative characteristics Republicans typically embrace?
Coincidently, it took the Obama campaign nearly two weeks to come up with a response to McCain’s celebrity ad. And now, the campaign is hoping to dupe its supporters into helping it reach its maniacal fundraising goals. According to CNN’s Political Ticker,
Aside from the fact that many supporters of Obama’s campaign (unfortunately members of my generation) are a bit Lemmistic in their inclinations that Obama is going to literally and figuratively save the planet, it is important to note the inherent weaknesses in the above statements. First off, Obama’s campaign supporters may, indeed, respond by donating more money to push the campaign over its goal of two million individuals donors, but wouldn’t an infusion of campaign donations make Obama supporters look like Lemmings? The campaign has apparently admitted that it is hoping that the “backlash from that television spot” will push it towards its fiscal goal. Exploitation? I think so. And the campaign is actually admitting that it hopes to see supporters respond.
Secondly, I would think that a campaign that has reneged on its promise to accept the federal grant for general election spending would do everything in its power to not call attention to yet another flapjack.
Obama continues to act as though he is an anomaly — untouched by the corruption that is so vigorously wedded to the American political system. Simply saying that one is a champion for “change” is ineffective. Obama has yet to champion change; he simply uses the word to ignite a mistaken ideology that he differs from other Washington heavy-hitters. Look at his record. In 2004 he claimed that he did not have the experience to be the nation’s leader and today he is touring the country with an entirely different diatribe:
“You know, I am a believer in knowing what you are doing when you apply for a job, and I think that if I were to seriously consider running on a national ticket I would essentially have to start now, before having served a day in the Senate. Now there are some people that might be comfortable doing that, but I am not one of those people. ” - Barack Obama, November 2004
Don’t believe me about his politics as usual demeanor? Read about his initial state Senate run in Illinois. Obama’s campaign disqualified an incumbent and another potential candidate for office by invalidating signatories one by one. Dirty, though legal, Chicago politics as usual.
Obama sees himself as some sort of pseudo-messianic character who has come to change American politics forever. But, simply reading his past political actions and his current contradictory statements shows that he is no different from the politicians he is consistently criticizing. Maybe McCain’s right:
Touché.
Stevens’ Federal Indictment, CRS Reporting, Consumer Rights & Wal-Mart’s Alleged Political Posturing
By Lyle Hickman and Billy Hallowell
Today’s Transparency Recap starts way up north with our coldest state, Alaska. According to Talking Points Memo’s, Republican Senator Ted Stevens was “arraigned last week on seven counts of false statements”. After a federal indictment, without stagnation, Stevens regrouped and organized a rally. According to Talking Points Memo:
At 9:30 AM AKDT today, Stevens held a rally at his campaign headquarters in Anchorage, Alaska. While his poll numbers have not flagged for the upcoming Alaska Republican primary, they have plummeted in general election polls. Stevens’ likely Democratic opponent Mark Begich leads the incumbent Stevens (sub. req.) 56% to 35% according to a July 30-31 study.
Stevens, followed by a fleet of leather-draped motorcyclists, made a grand entrance warming the atmosphere in the typically cold climate of Anchorage, Alaska. Talking Points Memo quotes Senator Stevens before his supporters saying, “The primary is the goal right now. Help me win that primary and help me be the candidate for the Republican party. September will take care of itself.”
In other news, Secrecy News penned an interesting piece about Congress’ failure to adequately provide online access to CRS reports. According to the Secrecy News blog, the military judge handling Salim Ahmed Hamdan’s case (bin Laden’s taxi driver who was convicted yesterday for “material support of terrorism”) referenced a CRS report that was published on the Federation of American Scientists’ web site. Since Congress did not officially release the document, the judge utilized the FAS source by providing the link to the document in his footnotes. According to Secrecy News:
“Perhaps [the judge] . . . implicitly affirmed that FAS and other public interest publishers of CRS collections are helping to compensate for that continuing policy defect by providing the online access to CRS reports that Congress has denied.”
According to OMB’s RegWatch blog, the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act that was recently passed by Congress provides many improvements that will benefit the general public. In a market that is dominated by cheap imports, OMB claims that the act will potentially lead the Consumer Product Safety Committee to better regulate the market, while providing consumers with the protection they deserve.
Moving on to the American Constitution Society’s Blog, the “Justice Integrity Act,” introduced by Senators Joseph Biden (D-Del.), John Kerry (D-Mass.), Benjamin Cardin (D-Md.), and Arlen Specter (R-Penn), is “a bill that would require the U.S. Attorney General to study racial and ethnic disparities in the judicial system… The measure, S.3245, would require the Attorney General to create advisory groups in ten federal districts to examine and determine the pervasiveness of racial and ethnic disparity in the criminal justice system.”
According to ACS Blog, this bill awaits the Senate Judiciary Committee. On an interesting transparency note, we were delighted to read that “the bill would require the Attorney General to make public the findings of the groups’ studies and recommendations on how to eliminate racial and ethnic disparities.”
Over at All Things Whistleblower, John McCain’s support for nuclear energy is under scrutiny. According to the ATW blog:
“Vote Republican – Save 10 Percent on All Purchases,” reads the title of www.opensecrets.org’s Capital Eye blog. According to the Capital Eye, the world’s largest retailer, Wal-Mart, urged its employees to place their ballots for a Republican candidate, “arguing that Democrats would pass a harmful bill allowing labor organizations to unionize workplaces without secret ballot elections. “ Wal-Mart denies suggesting its employees vote republican, while referencing their financial contributions to both the Democratic and Republican parties by their political action committee. The Capital Eye states:
Nonpartisan Endorsements, An Unsafe Embassy, and the Ideological Divide
By Billy Hallowell and Lyle Hickman
This week’s Transparency Recap opens with a Corruption Chronicles blog entry entitled “‘Nonpartisan’ La Raza Council Endorses Obama.” The National Council of La Raza was founded in 1968 in Washington D.C. as a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization. While the organization touts nonpartisan status, Judicial Watch (via its blog, the Corruption Chronicles) is charging partisan support for the presumed Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama. According to Corruption Chronicles:
Moving on, ABC News’ The Blotter covers a warning issued by the United States embassy located in Baghdad, Iraq. According to The Blotter, “Weapons are continuing to be left unattended throughout the Embassy compound . . .” Unattended weaponry in an embassy is unacceptable, especially when considering the current situation in Iraq. The war makes the embassy a prime target of the Iraqi insurgents. According to The Blotter the U.S. embassy warns its employees and cohorts:
In other news, Secrecy News penned a piece about the “Foreign Relations of the United States” — a series that the State Department defines as “. . . [a presentation of] the official documentary historical record of major U.S. foreign policy decisions and significant diplomatic activity. The series, which is produced by the State Department’s Office of the Historian, began in 1861 and now comprises more than 350 individual volumes.”
While one can easily see the importance of such an official historical account of U.S. activity, Secrecy News reports the following:
Over on the Sunlight blogs, Ellen Miller covers the growing divide between Sen. Joe Lieberman and the Democratic Party. According to Miller,
The relationship is in such shambles that left-wing activists are petitioning for Lieberman to be stripped of his rank and removed from his Homeland Security chairmanship. Democrats are calling for these actions to be taken following the 2008 presidential election in November.
And in other news, former Arlington National Cemetery Public Affairs Director Gina Gray was allegedly fired for advocating for more media access to soldiers’ funeral processions. After publicly disclosing the fact that ceremony officials are not allowing media access at funerals — even after families agreed to said coverage — Gray was fired. All Things Whistleblower poses an interesting thought regarding the next administration:
In closing, OpenSecrets.org’s Capital Eye is “Calling All Citizen Journalists.” Check the contest out and you could potentially win $100!
U.S. Dependence, Rove’s Testimony, Detroit’s Political Trauma & the Domestic Records of Terror Detainees
Happy Independence Day, America (a little late)! I hope everyone enjoyed the holiday. Today, we’re going to recap some of the best in transparency and citizen engagement news from the end of last week through yesterday — Monday, July 07, 2008.
Today’s recap starts with a piece entitled, “Red, White and Green” from the Capital Eye blog. While our entire nation has been celebrating our independence from Great Britain, we might actually be more dependent than we realize. According to Capital Eye,
Moreover, this dependency on certain industries should concern Americans. If our representatives in government are receiving money from companies, organizations and specific industries, how likely are they to represent our interests over the interests of their donors?
And over on the Corruption Chronicles blog, Detroit is the subject of conversation. According to CC, the city’s governing council is being investigated by the federal government for allegedly accepting bribes; the bribes were allegedly accepted by council members in exchange for the approval of a multi million dollar contract. According to CC:
In other news, Karl Rove will not be testifying in front of the House Judiciary Committee. According to CREW, Rove has apparently invoked executive privilege. According to Politico (as per CREW):
And over on the Washington Post’s Indep Dump blog, focus is centered upon detainees who have been apprehended abroad. Over the past six-and-a-half years, detainees apprehended in the War on Terror have been fingerprinted and processed. As it turns out, hundreds of these individuals have criminal records. According to Post:
And over on the CommonBlog, it’s all about Iran/U.S. relations and the measures currently brewing in the House and Senate.
Also, be sure to check out TPM’s Daily Muck for intriguing daily news briefs.
Sen. John Kerry: Still Irrelevant, Out of Touch, Off-base and Fringe
Does anyone else find it painfully ironic that John Kerry — a man who the American people found, via the electoral system, unfit to lead — is engaging in pointless commentary, while waging baseless claims against Sen. John McCain?
Over the weekend, Kerry called McCain “unfit to lead.” Am I incorrect in my assertion that it was Kerry who approached McCain in 2004, asking him to join in the formation of a bi-partisan ticket? Here we are four years later and John “The Flapjack” Kerry is at it again, flipping and flopping faster than a speeding light (whatever that means). On CBS’ Face The Nation, Kerry said:
Ironically, I am not surprised to find Kerry acting as childish and irreverent as ever. Kerry and Obama are totally fringe, but for some reason the Democrats continue to nominate their kind. They were and are two of the most liberal senators, as they stand firmly grounded on the left wing of the American political spectrum. Bipartisanship? Not from these guys. And during a time when we need nothing short of extreme collaboration and inter-party cohesiveness, the fact that the Democrats continue to nominate wing-nuts is extremely disconcerting.
In the interview, Kerry went on to bash McCain, citing the familiar “Bush’s third term” diatribe. I’m not sure if the Democrats realize this yet, but that statement is tired at best. Everyone knows that there are profound differences between McCain and Bush, so continuing to drive home an invalid point is useless. Kerry then proceeds to state the following:
Aside from the fact that McCain has an energy plan that greatly differs from George W. Bush’s (which is common knowledge), one wonders if Kerry has even glanced at Obama’s energy plan. Allow me to pull out a snippet for him:
Now, let’s explore ethanol in brief:
And I’m not even going to touch healthcare. McCain does have a plan, but Kerry’s probably too bitter over his 2004 loss to take the time and read it. And then there’s Iraq. Kerry has plenty to say about McCain’s judgment on the war:
And this is where Kerry loses me entirely. The surge has worked and that’s something that Obama is going to have to contend with come November. Continuing to lament the war, while demanding that the troops come home immediately is nonsensical. When success is so close, why would we exit the region? Doing so would mean a total disservice to the Iraqi people. Leaving Iraq would surely “serve up to Iran Iraq on a platter.” Is this not common sense?
I suppose that writing this piece has given Kerry credence he simply doesn’t deserve. In the end, he’s proven himself painfully irrelevant. Not much has changed since 2004.
Presidential Responsibility, Personal Financial Disclosure, Rep. Culberson and the "Millionaire’s Amendment"
This weekend’s edition of the Transparency Recap focuses begins with the POGO blog’s coverage of a Washington Post piece by Professor Paul Light. According to POGO, Light tackles the challenges the next president will face upon entering office. From organizing the many titles and positions within the executive branch, to better managing contractors, the needs associated with reformation are plentiful. POGO ends the entry with the following words:
And over at All Things Reform, David Weller is encouraging synergy! Check out his new list of online collaboration projects. If your organization is currently involved in implementing a project, this might be the perfect place to have it listed.
On the Sunlight blogs, Ellen Miller covers research conducted by the Center for Responsive Politics. According to Miller, the research surrounds the Personal Financial Disclosure forms of Congressional members. According to the Center for Responsive Politics:
Over at ReadtheBill.org, praise is in abundance for Rep. John Culberson (R-TX) who has been voicing concern over Congress’ inability to read bills prior to voting on them. ReadtheBill.org is encouraging Culberson to sponsor H.Res.504. According to Open Congress, the resolution would do the following: “[Amend] the Rules of the House of Representatives to require that legislation and conference reports be available on the Internet for 72 hours before consideration by the House, and for other purposes.”
The always-useful Secrecy News blog highlights some intriguing and relevant CRS reports. From Iran’s economy to the costs associated with war on terror operations, these reports are essential to explore. CDT covers one CRS report, in particular, on the PolicyBeta blog: CRS No. RL34454 — an overview of U.S. technology and science policy.
In California, judicial corruption was just dealt an impressive blow. As per the Corruption Chronicles, a California judge has been removed for “manifestly unjudicial” misconduct. According to CC:
Over at All Things Whistleblower, talk is centered upon three Congressional senators who are calling on Congress to investigate the FBI’s alleged treatment of an agent whistleblower. The agent testified in front of Congress back in May; his testimony focused on internal issues that have hampered counterterrorism strategy and effectiveness. Two days after the statements were made, he was accused of violating FBI rules and regulations.
And over on the Common blog, Common Cause discusses the launch of its new campaign: Recapture the Flag!
To conclude the weekend edition of the recap, be sure to check out Democracy21’s response to the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down the so-called “Millionaire’s Amendment.” According to the Democracy21 blog:
Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual
“Hope.” “Change.” “A new kind of politics.” Barack Obama’s promise to implement these ideals has led him top of the Democratic pack, as millions of Americans have contributed to his highly successful campaign. And who can blame Americans for jumping on board? On the surface, a platform that promises the invoke hope and change is surely enticing — especially after eight years of political and social turbulence. But, what do “hope” and “change” actually mean? If actions count for anything, Obama’s promise to ignite a “new kind of politics” is laughable at best. So, why are the American people missing all of the cues?
From race relations to the federal tax system, Obama continues to prove that his policies and allegiances possess the characteristics of nothing more than typical, run-of-the-mill political fodder. He’s no different from a traditional politician, yet for some reason his charismatic nature has inebriated my generation, in particular, severely impairing rational exploration of his actions, inactions and incessant flip-flops. Judicial Watch reports the following:
When we talk about proposed tax systems, Obama fares not much better than McCain. According to the Brooking Institution and the Urban Instutite, McCain’s plans would cut receipts by $3.72 trillion from over a 10 year period, while Obama’s plans would cut revenues by $2.73 trillion during the same time frame.
And what about a more general sense of fiscal discipline? The sad reality is that neither of the candidates’ proposals would balance the U.S. budget:
Obama’s spending plans for health care, infrastructure, education and energy aren’t even included in TPC’s estimate. With Social Security and Medicare in grave danger, allowing our officials to manage a health care system in the current political climate is frightening at best.
But his hypocrisy transcends these issues and extends into nearly every facet of his campaign. Last week, he went back on his word and announced that he would be forgoing more the $85 million in public financing — a move that has McCain and many others (even Obama supporters) frustrated and disheartened. So much for bi-partisan negotiations. According to OpenSecrets:
And while I’m at it, allow me to mention his insane endorsement of ethanol as a viable fuel alternative. I can’t imagine that he has missed the media’s coverage of the destruction that has been caused by the utilization of ethanol. Damaging the world’s fuel supply and potentially worsening the alleged global warming phenomenon apparently doesn’t matter to Obama. Judicial Watch reports the following:
I suppose forgetting to mention Rev. Wright would be irresponsible of me. See, Obama attended the same church for years. He listened to anti-American and anti-white statements and seemed completely content with his pastor’s rants — that is, until his church membership hurt his campaign. It was not until pressures mounted that Obama formerly removed his allegiances to Wright and company.
Are we supposed to believe that Obama was never happy at his church — that he always differed ideologically from Rev. Wright? Believing such an idea would be nonsensical. No one stays at a church if they disagree with the leading pastor. And if by some chance Obama did stay despite some difference in opinion he surely wouldn’t have allowed his pastor to marry he and his wife or baptize his children. And wasn’t Wright an inspiration for one of his books? Obama agrees with Rev. Wright entirely — he just can’t admit that to the American people.
Perhaps Judicial Watch said it best: “Somehow, the charismatic young lawmaker that the mainstream media loves to portray as a sort of rock star doesn’t seem any different than most Washington heavy hitters.”
Obama Opts Out, Lobbyists Hold Back, and Nuke Components Missing, Among Other Transparency News
Welcome to the Friday edition of the Transparency Recap. Since we last published, the political arena has been bustling with news and happenings. Since it’s been a few days since the last recap, we’ll try to cover the most impactful events that occurred during the course of the week.
Undoubtedly, one of the biggest issues this week has been the privatization of Obama’s campaign finances. According to OpenSecrets’ Capital Eye blog, Obama has forgoed more than $80 in public financing “…making him the first major party nominee to reject the taxpayers’ grant since the program began in 1976.” While Obama insists that the system if broken, McCain (who plans to use the public financing system) is accusing Obama of going back on his word to stay within the public system.
On this same issue, Democracy 21 issued a pointed statement about Obama’s decision to privatize:
This morning, Capital Eye shifted gears and posted a piece that focuses on two of the nation’s biggest lobbying firms. These firms — Cassidy and Associates and Van Scoyoc Associates — will not “…attend either political party’s gathering, sponsor parties or donate to the host committees that organize the four-day fetes.” Sure, these big-wigs aren’t participating in the aforementioned terms, but the money flow is still coming through:
And if that’s not hair-raising enough, according to the Judicial Watch blog, the U.S. military has lost nuclear missile components. According to Judicial Watch,
Over on the Sunlight blogs, Ellen Miller coins her own phrase: “Tweetalogue.” Over the past few days, she and Rep. John Culberson have been twittering back and forth. The issue at hand? Ample time for government officials — and citizens — to read bills before they are voted on. According to Miller (and VoterWatch mirrors this sentiment),
Over at All Things Whistleblower, John McCain is taking heat for his energy proposal that calls for 45 nuclear energy plants over the next 22 years. From pricing to safety, some individuals have serious problems with the construction of more nuclear power plants. With this said, others see this plan as a step in the right direction — away from America’s current reliance on fossil fuels.
On the POGO blog, focus is centered upon the Heroes Earnings Assistance and Relief Tax Act of 2008. Signed into law by President Bush on Tuesday, this law “requires foreign subsidiaries of federal contractors to be treated as American companies for tax purposes.” Due to the changes it is expected that $850 million in tax revenues will be generated over the next 10 years:
Countrywide Financial Scandal Boils Over, While Soft Money and Earmarks Come Back With a Vengeance
A few days have passed since our last Transparency Recap. If you’re a regular reader, you probably recall seeing Ellen Miller’s coverage of the soft money and its role in the 2008 campaign in our last edition. I was happy to learn that the issue hasn’t gone away. Today, the Capital Eye blog continues the coverage streak:
Clearly, this is an issue that screams public interest, so continued coverage is more than welcome. Explore the article further for some prime examples of companies who are contributing to the conventions this year.
Over on the Free Government Information blog, discussion is centered upon this past Wednesday’s hearing on H.R. 6193, The “Improving Public Access to Documents Act.” The FGI blog has reprinted Patrice McDermott’s testimony, which sheds some intriguing light on the current state of transparency:
And on the scandal-ridden front, it turns out that Barack Obama’s (former) advisor — Jim Johnson — isn’t the only politician who is connected to the Countrywide Financial Corp. scandal (following disclosure of his alleged ties to the company, Johnson resigned from an advisory post within the Obama campaign). Others who have allegedly used the V.I.P. loan program are Christopher Dodd, Kent Conrad, and Richard Holbrooke (Jimmy Carters assistant Secretary of State), among others.
As per Paul Blumenthal on the Sunlight blogs:
Over at Common Cause’s Common Blog allegations against the Bush Administration are raging. On Tuesday, Common Cause hosted a panel to discuss the alleged violations. While reporting on the panel’s topical coverage, blogger Mary Jo Cittadino penned the following:
And as usual, All Things Reform is making surfing the blogosphere more productive, more proactive — and much simpler! In addition to regularly reading the Transparency Recap, we recommend that you check out the ATR site for updated feeds from a plethora of government reform organizations.
Over on OMB Watch’s budget blog, be sure to check out today’s fiscal policy report for information on unemployment, earmarks and taxes. To recap: earmarks are making a (less than stylish) comeback, unemployment isn’t looking too good, and multi-million dollar increases to the national debt could potentially be on the horizon.