Nothing from nothing leaves nothing.
Monday, March 30, 2009
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Restoring the Palimpsest until March 26, 2009
We share some bad habits of medieval monks. We decide a record isn't sll thst importsnt, scrub the parchment clean, then write our current, comforting interpretation on the page we insist is not just blank now, but has always been a tabula rasa.
Luckily, there are means of examination that reveal the original record and scholars like Dr. John Hope Franklin who patiently uncover the real past and set us on the path to our true destiny.
Dr. Franklin taught us to look and the looking expanded the scope of history to people who were written out and abandoned to the margins even when they were major players. He enabled us to see how far we've actually come and how far we yet must go.
He will be missed, because he cannot be replaced.
Alfred C. Ingram
Conceptual Design & Imaging
773 530-1554
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Blueprint
Americans United for Change, a labor group, is beginning a “six-figure” buy for national cable TV stations to focus on several states whose lawmakers may be critical to providing votes that back the president’s plans. Jeremy Funk, a spokesman for the group, said the initial buy was about $350,000 and could double as the ad campaign runs through the time of the budget negotiations. The labor group’s ad highlights economic worries. Titled “Blueprint,” the ad closes by saying: “Call Congress. Tell them you support President Obama’s budget. Let’s all get to work rebuilding America.”
Sunday, March 15, 2009
US Torture: Voices from the Black Sites - The New York Review of Books
US Torture: Voices from the Black Sites - The New York Review of Books:
There are no surprises here.
Their favorite show was "24". They thought it was real.
They thought our Constitution, and treaties like the Geneva Conventions, made us weak.
So, they did what Bin Laden could only dream of doing.
Damage no terrorist could ever do.
Damage we could only do to ourselves, from the inside.
Read these excerpts.
"…
The detainee would be photographed, both clothed and naked prior to and again after transfer. A body cavity check (rectal examination) would be carried out and some detainees alleged that a suppository (the type and the effect of such suppositories was unknown by the detainees), was also administered at that moment.
The detainee would be made to wear a diaper and dressed in a tracksuit. Earphones would be placed over his ears, through which music would sometimes be played. He would be blindfolded with at least a cloth tied around the head and black goggles. In addition, some detainees alleged that cotton wool was also taped over their eyes prior to the blindfold and goggles being applied....
The detainee would be shackled by [the] hands and feet and transported to the airport by road and loaded onto a plane. He would usually be transported in a reclined sitting position with his hands shackled in front. The journey times...ranged from one hour to over twenty-four to thirty hours. The detainee was not allowed to go to the toilet and if necessary was obliged to urinate and defecate into the diaper.
One works the imagination trying to picture what it was like in this otherworldly place: blackness in place of vision. Silence—or "sometimes" loud music—in place of sounds of life. Shackles, together sometimes with gloves, in place of the chance to reach, touch, feel. One senses metal on wrist and ankle, cotton against eyes, cloth across face, shit and piss against skin. On "some occasions detainees were transported lying flat on the floor of the plane...with their hands cuffed behind their backs," causing them "severe pain and discomfort," as they were moved from one unknown location to another.
…
A few weeks later, from October 6 to 11 and then from December 4 to 14, 2006, officials of the International Committee of the Red Cross—among whose official and legally recognized duties is to monitor compliance with the Geneva Conventions and to supervise treatment of prisoners of war—traveled to Guantánamo and began interviewing "each of these persons in private" in order to produce a report that would "provide a description of the treatment and material conditions of detention of the fourteen during the period they were held in the CIA detention program," periods ranging "from 16 months to almost four and a half years."
As the ICRC interviewers informed the detainees, their report was not intended to be released to the public but, "to the extent that each detainee agreed for it to be transmitted to the authorities," to be given in strictest secrecy to officials of the government agency that had been in charge of holding them—in this case the Central Intelligence Agency, to whose acting general counsel, John Rizzo, the report was sent on February 14, 2007. Indeed, though almost all of the information in the report has names attached, and though annexes contain extended narratives drawn from interviews with three of the detainees, whose names are used, we do find a number of times in the document variations of this formula: "One of the detainees who did not wish his name to be transmitted to the authorities alleged..."—suggesting that at least one and perhaps more than one of the fourteen, who are, after all, still "held in a high-security facility at Guantánamo," worried about repercussions that might come from what he had said.
In virtually all such cases, the allegations made are echoed by other, named detainees; indeed, since the detainees were kept "in continuous solitary confinement and incommunicado detention" throughout their time in "the black sites," and were kept strictly separated as well when they reached Guantánamo, the striking similarity in their stories, even down to small details, would seem to make fabrication extremely unlikely, if not impossible. "The ICRC wishes to underscore," as the writers tell us in the introduction, "that the consistency of the detailed allegations provided separately by each of the fourteen adds particular weight to the information provided below."
The result is a document—labeled "confidential" and clearly intended only for the eyes of those senior American officials to whom the CIA's Mr. Rizzo would show it—that tells a certain kind of story, a narrative of what happened at "the black sites" and a detailed description, by those on whom they were practiced, of what the President of the United States described to Americans as an "alternative set of procedures." It is a document for its time, literally "impossible to put down," from its opening page—
Contents Introduction 1. Main Elements of the CIA Detention Program 1.1 Arrest and Transfer 1.2 Continuous Solitary Confinement and Incommunicado Detention 1.3 Other Methods of Ill-treatment 1.3.1 Suffocation by water 1.3.2 Prolonged Stress Standing 1.3.3 Beatings by use of a collar 1.3.4 Beating and kicking 1.3.5 Confinement in a box 1.3.6 Prolonged nudity 1.3.7 Sleep deprivation and use of loud music 1.3.8 Exposure to cold temperature/cold water 1.3.9 Prolonged use of handcuffs and shackles 1.3.10 Threats 1.3.11 Forced shaving 1.3.12 Deprivation/restricted provision of solid food 1.4 Further elements of the detention regime....
—to its stark and unmistakable conclusion:
The allegations of ill-treatment of the detainees indicate that, in many cases, the ill-treatment to which they were subjected while held in the CIA program, either singly or in combination, constituted torture. In addition, many other elements of the ill-treatment, either singly or in combination, constituted cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.
Such unflinching clarity, from the body legally charged with overseeing compliance with the Geneva Conventions—in which the terms "torture" and "cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment" are accorded a strictly defined legal meaning—couldn't be more significant, or indeed more welcome after years in which the President of the United States relied on the power of his office either to redefine or to obfuscate what are relatively simple words. "This debate is occurring," as President Bush told reporters in the Rose Garden the week after he delivered his East Room speech,
because of the Supreme Court's ruling that said that we must conduct ourselves under the Common Article III of the Geneva Convention. And that Common Article III says that, you know, there will be no outrages upon human dignity. It's like—it's very vague. What does that mean, "outrages upon human dignity"?[5]
In allowing Abu Zubaydah and the other thirteen "high-value detainees" to tell their own stories, this report manages to answer, with great power and authority, the President's question."
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Op-Ed Columnist - Reviving the Dream - NYTimes.com
Op-Ed Columnist - Reviving the Dream - NYTimes.com:
"As Jared Bernstein, now the chief economic adviser to Vice President Joseph Biden, wrote in the preface to his book, “Crunch: Why Do I Feel So Squeezed? (And Other Unsolved Economic Mysteries)”:
“Economics has been hijacked by the rich and powerful, and it has been forged into a tool that is being used against the rest of us.”
Working people were not just abandoned by big business and their ideological henchmen in government, they were exploited and humiliated. They were denied the productivity gains that should have rightfully accrued to them. They were treated ruthlessly whenever they tried to organize. They were never reasonably protected against the savage dislocations caused by revolutions in technology and global trade.
Working people were told that all of this was good for them, and whether out of ignorance or fear or prejudice or, as my grandfather might have said, damned foolishness, many bought into it. They signed onto tax policies that worked like a three-card monte game. And they were sold a snake oil concoction called “trickle down” that so addled their brains that they thought it was a wonderful idea to hand over their share of the nation’s wealth to those who were already fabulously rich.
America used to be better than this.
The seeds of today’s disaster were sown some 30 years ago. Looking at income patterns during that period, my former colleague at The Times, David Cay Johnston, noted that from 1980 (the year Ronald Reagan was elected) to 2005, the national economy, adjusted for inflation, more than doubled. (Because of population growth, the actual increase per capita was about 66 percent.)
But the average income for the vast majority of Americans actually declined during those years. The standard of living for the average family improved not because incomes grew but because women entered the workplace in droves.
As hard as it may be to believe, the peak income year for the bottom 90 percent of Americans was way back in 1973, when the average income per taxpayer, adjusted for inflation, was $33,000. That was nearly $4,000 higher, Mr. Johnston pointed out, than in 2005.
Men have done particularly poorly. Men who are now in their 30s — the prime age for raising families — earn less money than members of their fathers’ generation did at the same age.
It may seem like ancient history, but in the first few decades following World War II, the United States, despite many serious flaws, established the model of a highly productive society that shared its prosperity widely and made investments that were geared toward a more prosperous, more fulfilling future.
The American dream was alive and well and seemingly unassailable. But somehow, following the oil shocks, the hyperinflation and other traumas of the 1970s, Americans allowed the right-wingers to get a toehold — and they began the serious work of smothering the dream.
Ronald Reagan saw Medicare as a giant step on the road to socialism. Newt Gingrich, apparently referring to the original fee-for-service version of Medicare, which was cherished by the elderly, cracked, “We don’t get rid of it in Round One because we don’t think it’s politically smart.”
The right-wingers were crafty: You smother the dream by crippling the programs that support it, by starving the government of money to pay for them, by funneling the government’s revenues to the rich through tax cuts and other benefits, by looting the government the way gangsters loot legitimate businesses and then pleading poverty when it comes time to fund the services required by the people.
The anti-tax fanatic Grover Norquist summed the matter up nicely when he famously said, “Our goal is to shrink the government to the size where you can drown it in a bathtub.” Only they didn’t shrink the government, they enlarged it and turned its bounty over to the rich."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/10/opinion/10herbert.html?ref=opinion
Saturday, March 07, 2009
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Op-Ed Columnist - What We Don’t Know Will Hurt Us - NYTimes.com
Op-Ed Columnist - What We Don’t Know Will Hurt Us - NYTimes.com:
"We are plugged into more information sources than anyone could have imagined even 15 years ago. The cruel ambush of 9/11 supposedly “changed everything,” slapping us back to reality. Yet we are constantly shocked, shocked by the foreseeable. Obama’s toughest political problem may not be coping with the increasingly marginalized G.O.P. but with an America-in-denial that must hear warning signs repeatedly, for months and sometimes years, before believing the wolf is actually at the door."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/22/opinion/22rich.html?ref=opinion
Thursday, February 19, 2009
All Roland Burris had to do was tell the truth. Instead, he covered up a `crime' that wasn't there | Change of Subject
"I've heard it said that if leaders in the U.S. Senate had only known in early January the story that Burris is telling today, they never would have agreed to seat him. He wouldn't now be our temporary (I call him that not just to comfort myself, but because that's how the 17th Amendment refers to non-elected replacements) junior senator.
Nonsense.
Absent evidence of rank criminal behavior on Burris' part, any effort to keep him out of the Senate would have been blocked by the courts. His was a legal appointment, no matter how dismaying the circumstances. And the last thing the Democratic Senate majority needed in the run-up to Obama's inauguration and the fight over the stimulus package was a constitutional crisis with racial overtones.
He was safe. All he had to do was tell the truth—expansively, generously, perhaps even with a touch of humility and self-awareness, though no one was demanding miracles.
In our new, weekly podcast with WGN-AM morning host John Williams, my fellow columnist Mary Schmich said Wednesday that Burris 'misunderstood the moment' in Illinois when he used lawyerly evasions to offer fractional truths in his sworn testimony before the state House impeachment panel and in various affidavits. 'In this environment, [such deception] incites people in a way that it might not otherwise,' she said. 'It represents the larger problem.'
(Listen to and find out more about the podcast here)
Put another way, Burris testified as though he believed his most important mission after his appointment was to create distance between himself and our disgraced"
Friday, February 13, 2009
Op-Ed Columnist - Failure to Rise - NYTimes.com
Op-Ed Columnist - Failure to Rise - NYTimes.com:
The Congressional Budget Office, not usually given to hyperbole, predicts that over the next three years there will be a $2.9 trillion gap between what the economy could produce and what it will actually produce. And $800 billion, while it sounds like a lot of money, isn’t nearly enough to bridge that chasm.
"In both the House and the Senate, the vast majority of Republicans rallied behind the idea that the appropriate response to the abject failure of the Bush administration’s tax cuts is more Bush-style tax cuts.
And the rhetorical response of conservatives to the stimulus plan — which will, it’s worth bearing in mind, cost substantially less than either the Bush administration’s $2 trillion in tax cuts or the $1 trillion and counting spent in Iraq — has bordered on the deranged.
It’s “generational theft,” said Senator John McCain, just a few days after voting for tax cuts that would, over the next decade, have cost about four times as much.
It’s “destroying my daughters’ future. It is like sitting there watching my house ransacked by a gang of thugs,” said Arnold Kling of the Cato Institute.
And the ugliness of the political debate matters because it raises doubts about the Obama administration’s ability to come back for more if, as seems likely, the stimulus bill proves inadequate."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/13/opinion/13krugman.html?ref=opinion
Monday, February 09, 2009
GRIT TV
Starting this week TheNation.com is live streaming GRIT TV with Laura Flanders daily, Monday to Thursday. Hosted by longtime Nation contributor Laura Flanders, GRIT TV is a daily public affairs and news program featuring discussions of politics, media, news and culture, often with Nation contributors as guests. GRIT airs from 2:00 to 4:00pm EST Mondays through Thursdays. In today's episode, Nation contributor Robert Pollin discusses the economic recovery bill, while healthcare expert Trudy Lieberman explores the prospects for heath care reform in the wake of the Daschle dustup
Saturday, February 07, 2009
If they only had a brain...
Op-Ed Columnist - Playing With Fire - NYTimes.com: It’s been clear for years that the G.O.P. is a party without a heart. But its pointless obstructionism, its overall lack of any serious response to what is a clear national economic emergency, seems to indicate it’s also a party without a brain.
"With the economy in deep, deep trouble, and Americans suffering by the tens of millions, the Republicans spent much of the week doing their same-old, bad-faith Neanderthal two-step: trying their best to derail the economic stimulus package working its difficult way through Congress.
“This bill is stinking up the place,” said Lindsey Graham, a Republican senator from South Carolina who not only opposed the legislation but wanted to make sure that no one would mistake him for a class act.
One of the goals of the package, of course, is to begin cleaning up the holy mess that resulted from the long, dark night of G.O.P. control in Washington. President Obama went out of his way to get a substantial number of Republicans to make a genuine effort to move the economic revitalization process along, but was rebuffed, and in some cases contemptuously.
On Thursday night, he struck back, attacking Republican intransigence and its failed policies of the past. On Friday morning, with the government reporting that nearly 600,000 more jobs had been lost in January, the president went public again, stressing how irresponsible it would be to do nothing in the face of the growing crisis.
Neither the job losses nor the president’s prodding was enough to prompt much of a response from the Republicans. But by Friday evening, it appeared that a small number of G.O.P. senators, enough to assure Senate passage of a revised (and watered-down) stimulus package by a very slim margin, had come aboard.
But only a small number. Even as the report of an agreement was being circulated, Senator Bob Corker, a Tennessee Republican, was bad-mouthing the package on CNN. “This bill is a disaster,” he said.
It’s been clear for years that the G.O.P. is a party without a heart. But its pointless obstructionism, its overall lack of any serious response to what is a clear national economic emergency, seems to indicate it’s also a party without a brain.
Republicans in Washington have behaved like a milling crowd standing in the way of firefighters trying to respond to a devastating blaze. The best that can be said for the party is that a few senators seem to have been able part the crowd enough to let the rescuers begin to inch forward.
President Obama addressed Republican inflexibility on Thursday night when he said at a gathering in Williamsburg, Va., “Don’t come to the table with the same tired arguments and worn ideas that helped to create this crisis.” He added that without swift action on the stimulus bill, “an economy that is already in crisis will be faced with catastrophe.”
The report of January’s enormous job losses came roughly a dozen hours later. It was the latest in a long and hideous pattern of employment woes, much of it resulting from the G.O.P.’s obsession with destructive supply-side economic voodoo.… " http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/07/opinion/07herbert.html?ref=opinion
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Monday, January 12, 2009
People don’t eat in the long run. They eat every day
Editorial Observer - Republicans’ Latest Talking Point - The New Deal Failed - NYTimes.com:
"Congressional Republicans say Mr. Obama’s stimulus will cost too much, and that over time the economy will cure itself. When critics raised the same objections to F.D.R.’s programs, his relief administrator, Harry Hopkins, had a ready answer: “People don’t eat in the long run. They eat every day.”"
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/12/opinion/12mon4.html?ref=opinionWednesday, December 31, 2008
The Yale Book of Quotations - Shapiro, Fred R.; Epstein, Joseph - Yale University Press - Sent Using Google Toolbar
The Yale Book of Quotations - Shapiro, Fred R.; Epstein, Joseph - Yale University Press
Author Fred R. Shapiro's
Most Notable Quotations of 2008
1. "I can see Russia from my house!" — Sarah Palin on her foreign-policy credentials, as satirized by Tina Fey, NBC "Saturday Night Live" broadcast, Sept. 13, 2008
2. "All of them, any of them that have been in front of me over all these years." — Sarah Palin responding to Katie Couric's asking her to specifically name newspapers or magazines she reads, CBS News interview, Oct. 1, 2008
3. "We have sort of become a nation of whiners." — Phil Gramm on Americans concerned about the economy, quoted in Washington Times, July 10, 2008
4. "It's not based on any particular data point, we just wanted to choose a really large number." — Treasury spokeswoman explaining how the $700 billion number was chosen for the initial bailout, quoted on Forbes.com, Sept. 23, 2008
5. "The fundamentals of America's economy are strong." — John McCain, interview with Peter Cook on Bloomberg TV, Apr. 17, 2008
6. "Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency." — Department of the Treasury's proposed Emergency Economic Stabilization Act, Sept. 2008
7. "Maybe 100." — John McCain on how many years U.S. troops could remain in Iraq, response at town hall meeting, Derry, N.H., Jan. 3, 2008
8. "I'll see you at the debates, bitches." — Paris Hilton, video responding to John McCain ad attacking Barack Obama as a celebrity, Aug. 2008
9. "At a time of great crisis with mortgage foreclosures and autos, he [Barack Obama] says we only have one president at a time. I'm afraid that overstates the number of presidents we have." — Barney Frank, remark to consumer advocates, Dec. 4, 2008
10. (tie) "Cash for trash." — Paul Krugman on the financial bailout, New York Times, Sept. 22, 2008
10. (tie) "There are no atheists in foxholes and there are no libertarians in financial crises." — Paul Krugman, interview by Bill Maher on HBO's "Real Time" broadcast, Sept. 19, 2008
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Illinois' Reporters Need Courage And An Old Pair of Shoes
In an attempt borrowed from Blazing Saddle's governor Pettimaine to save his "phoney-baloney job," Rod Blagojevich has chosen former Illinois Atty. General Roland Burris to be his Sherriff Bart.“Gov. Rod Blagojevich is expected today to name former Illinois Atty. Gen. Roland Burris to replace President-elect Barack Obama in the U.S. Senate. The action comes despite warnings by Democratic Senate leaders that they would not seat anyone appointed by the disgraced governor who faces criminal charges of trying to sell the post, sources familiar with the decision said. Shortly after Obama's Nov. 4 victory, Burris made known his interest in an appointment to the Senate but was never seriously considered, according to Blagojevich insiders. But in the days following Blagojevich's arrest, and despite questions over the taint of a Senate appointment, Burris stepped up his efforts to win the governor's support. Though he is 71, Burris has said that Obama's replacement should be able to win re-election and he has noted that despite a string of primary losses in races ranging from Chicago mayor to governor and U.S. senator, he's never lost to a Republican. Blagojevich, who has sole authority to name a replacement senator, scheduled a 2 p.m. news conference at his downtown Chicago office. Blagojevich's criminal defense attorney Ed Genson had said Blagojevich would not name a Senate successor to Obama. The governor had indicated he agreed with other Illinois politicians that the best option might be a special election to fill Obama's seat. But state lawmakers have not taken up the necessary legislation. U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada previously warned Blagojevich, following the governor's Dec. 9 arrest, that Senate Democrats would not seat any appointment the two-term Democratic governor made. Reid's warning was contained in a letter signed by all 50 sitting Democratic senators, including the No. 2 Democrat in Senate leadership, Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois. Federal authorities, citing secret wiretap recordings, allege Blagojevich sought a Cabinet position, an ambassadorship or a high-paying job from the incoming Obama administration in exchange for naming a candidate favored by the president-elect to the vacancy. An internal report by the Obama transition team found no offers of any quid pro quo in conversations held by incoming White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel and Blagojevich and the governor's staff regarding the seat.” From the New York Times “As recently as ten days ago, his lawyer, Edward Genson, said he would not attempt to make an appointment, since Senate leaders had indicated they would not accept anyone whom the beleaguered Mr. Blagojevich had appointed. The Democratic leaders of the Senate repeated that view on Tuesday, issuing a statement saying it was “truly regrettable that despite requests from all 50 Democratic Senators and public officials throughout Illinois, Governor Blagojevich would take the imprudent step of appointing someone to the United States Senate who would serve under a shadow and be plagued by questions of impropriety.” The statement continued, ‘We say this without prejudice toward Roland Burris’s ability, and we respect his years of public service. But this is not about Mr. Burris; it is about the integrity of a governor accused of attempting to sell this United States Senate seat. Under these circumstances, anyone appointed by Gov. Blagojevich cannot be an effective representative of the people of Illinois and, as we have said, will not be seated by the Democratic Caucus.’” In an attempt borrowed from Blazing Saddle's governor Pettimaine to save his "phoney-baloney job," Rod Blagojevich has chosen former Illinois Atty. General Roland Burris to be his Sherriff Bart. This is a blatant attempt to peel away African American support for his impeachment.
Candy bars are nice to have, but if one comes into contact with a pile of dog crap it's no longer worth having.He accomplioshed his objective. He spread the shame around. My congressman Bobby Rush has fallen for it. He has the mistaken belief that Barack's seat belongs to black America instead of Illinois. This has blinded him to the pitfall ahead. He is even going to attempt to drag the Congressional Black Caucus into the pit with him. I'm a afraid that there's nothing but a pile of Blagojevich at the pit's bottom, not gold, silver or any other precious thing. The one useful lesson to learn from our embattled governor, is that those who try to mine political positions for personal gain end up the proud owners of backed up latrines, unfit for the high position they think themselves entitled to hold, or polite company. Unfortunately, our culture doesn't throw shoes at these idiots. Perhaps it's time to change that.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
ResourceShelf » Blog Archive » Resource of the Week: Change Is Good
ResourceShelf » Blog Archive » Resource of the Week: Change Is Good
Resource of the Week: Change Is Good
By Shirl Kennedy, Senior Editor
By Shirl Kennedy, Senior Editor
Here in the U.S., at long last, we have a new President-Elect. And, for the first time, this means a new presidential transition website. Simple but elegant and still under construction — Change.gov. At the top left, you'll see a countdown, in days, till the January 20, 2009 inauguration.
"The Newsroom" is basically a blog of press releases from the new administration that sits front and center on the site. You'll also find biographies of Barack Obama, the President-Elect, and Joe Biden, the Vice President-Elect. You can watch Obama's election victory speech in Grant Park, in Chicago.
There are a variety of links at the bottom of the page under the headings Newsroom, Learn, American Moment, America Serves, and About This Site. There's also a link you can click to apply for a job in the new administration. Fill out the brief online form and you'll receive, via e-mail, a link to a more extensive online form. (Note: These are non-career positions, not civil service.)
Among the links at the bottom of the page — and also along the right side — you'll find a link to something called the GSA Transition Directory:
The Presidential Transition Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-293) authorizes the General Services Administration (GSA) to develop a transition directory in consultation with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). The Act provides that the transition directory "shall be a compilation of Federal publications and materials with supplementary materials developed by the Administrator that provides information on the officers, organization, and statutory and administrative authorities, functions, duties, responsibilities, and mission of each department and agency." Senate Report 106-348 clarifies that the directory is intended to "assist in navigating the many responsibilities that fall on a new administration" that is "confronted by an overwhelming amount of material."
Obviously, there's not much information here yet, but if you click around, you will find some interesting governmental odds and ends:
- A Survivor's Guide for Presidential Nominees, from The Brookings Institution.
- Links to relevant sections of the U.S. Government Manual (2008-09 Edition).
- A link to the Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2009
- A link to An Overview of the Executive Branch Ethics Program, from the United States Office of Government Ethics
- A link to a PDF document: Preparing Presidential Appointees for Leadership: A History (PDF; 157 KB)
- What will the Federal government pay to relocate a new Appointee and his/her family? Look here.
- Information about Freedom of Information
And the new administration wants to hear from you:
Tell us your story and the issues that matter most to you. Share with us your concerns and hopes – the policies you want to see carried out in the next four years.
The White House Transition Project is an interesting resource:
Since 1997, the White House Transition Project has combined the efforts of scholars, universities, and policy institutions to smooth out the American presidential transition. WHTP bridges the gaps between the partisan forces engaged in settling elections and the decision processes essential to governing by providing non-partisan information about the challenges of the American presidential transition and the strategies for overcoming those challenges. It provides these and other resources to presidential campaigns, to the president-elect, and to the new administration. These resources include three separate report series providing a White House institutional memory, perspectives on past transitions, and advanced research covering special aspects of transitions and governing. The WHTP also provides unique analysis of the appointments process and a clearinghouse on other transition resources.
Lots of historical stuff here, including photo archives. A couple items of note:
+ Presidential Power in National Security: A Guide to the President-Elect (PDF; 500 KB), from the Law Library of Congress
+ White House Transition Project Expert Registry (PDF; 211 KB)
Other transition resources, governmental and otherwise:
+ Hearing — "Passing the Baton: Preparing for the Presidential Transition"
On Wednesday, September 24, 2008, at 2:00 p.m., in room 2247 of the Rayburn House Office Building, the Subcommittee held a hearing titled, "Passing the Baton: Preparing for the Presidential Transition."
This hearing continued the Subcommittee's oversight of the ongoing preparations for the upcoming presidential transition. With only 77 days between the November election and the January inauguration, the transition teams of the executive branch and the incoming administration will have much work to do to ensure that the incoming Administration can begin its work immediately. The hearing reviewed the steps that GSA is taking to fulfill its responsibility to assist members of the incoming and outgoing administrations. The hearing also reviewed expert research on federal executive management challenges surrounding the transition.
Testimonies and other documents in PDF.
+ General Services Administration: Presidential Transition
The transfer of power from one administration to the next marks a significant moment in U.S. history. The Presidential Transition Acts of 1963 and 2000 give the General Services Administration (GSA) a prominent role in this process. They authorize the Administrator of GSA to provide the President-elect and the Vice-President-elect the services and facilities needed to assume their official duties.
+ Government Accountability Office: 2009 Congressional and Presidential Transition
Following each presidential election, GAO serves as a resource to assist with the transition to a new Congress and administration. On this Web site, using its institutional knowledge and broad-based, nonpartisan work on matters across the government spectrum, GAO provides insight into, and recommendations for addressing, the nation's major issues, risks and challenges. Also located throughout the site are key reports for further research, as well as contact information for and video messages from GAO experts.
+ Council for Excellence in Government: Presidential Transition
Offers links to various news articles and reports. One hot item that will show up here soon — The Prune Book Online:
PrunesOnline is a must-have tool for prospective Presidential appointees, the Presidential Personnel Office looking for the best and brightest, members of Congress, journalists, advocacy groups, and regular citizens who want to know more about the people working for them. It's your guide to the presidential appointment process and the people involved.
This, of course, follows from the infamous "Plum Book" — United States Government Policy and Supporting Positions — the new version of which is due out this week.
Published by the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs and the House Committee on Government Reform alternately after each Presidential election, the Plum Book lists over 7,000 Federal civil service leadership and support positions in the legislative and executive branches of the Federal Government that may be subject to noncompetitive appointment, nationwide. Data covers positions such as agency heads and their immediate subordinates, policy executives and advisors, and aides who report to these officials. The duties of many such positions may involve advocacy of Administration policies and programs and the incumbents usually have a close and confidential working relationship with the agency or other key officials.
+ IBM Center for the Business of Government: The Presidential Transition
The next President will face a wide range of challenges - economic, political, and social. He will need to be able to lead an effective government that can address these challenges. The IBM Center for The Business of Government is committed to helping identify and bring best practices from research to practice to help address these issues.
There's a blog here, addressing "management challenges for the next president," as well as various guides, reports, and issue briefs.
+ 1105 Government Information Group: Government Transition 2009 Wiki
This public service Wiki site seeks to be a repository of those ideas and recommendations from knowledgeable organizations and experts–and provide a forum for elaboration and discussion. In particular, this site will focus on transition ideas pertaining to Program Execution, Performance Management, Procurement and Acquisition, the use of Information Technology, and the management of Human Capital in government.
This non-partisan site is being made available as a public service by 1105 Government Information Group. [The lead collaborators of the site currently include 1105 Government Information Group chief editors Wyatt Kash (Government Computer News), John Monroe (Federal Computer Week) and Nick Wakeman (Washington Technology) along with other government transition experts, including: John Kamensky, of the IBM Center for the Business of Government.
Of special note: the "Key Players" page, which seeks to "catalogue think tanks, government agencies, academic institutions and other thought leaders following and generating assessments about transition issues related to government management."
+ Congresspedia: Presidential transition resources
A fine collection of relevant laws, Congressional Research Service reports, discussions/hearings, media coverage, supporting documents and other materials. ("Congresspedia is part of SourceWatch, a similarly collaborative, wiki-based website documenting the people, organizations and issues shaping the public agenda.")
+ Finally, our friends at the Free Government Information blog have assembled a collection of special interest resources "relevant to government information and technology policies during this transition period" — The Transition: Information, Technology, and Information-Technology.
This entry was posted on Monday, November 10th, 2008 at 4:14 am and is filed under Government Documents and Political Information, Resource of the Week, Source File. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.
http://www.resourceshelf.com/2008/11/10/resource-of-the-week-change-is-good/
Friday, November 07, 2008
The Health Care Challenge: Sailing Into a Perfect Storm - Economix Blog - NYTimes.com
The Health Care Challenge: Sailing Into a Perfect Storm - Economix Blog - NYTimes.com
Either Americans in the higher income strata must step up to the cashier's window to help subsidize, with higher income taxes, the health care of the most hard-working members of the lower income classes, or the United States will have to evolve toward a noticeable two-tiered or multi-tiered health care system, with bare-bones, low-tech health care for families in the bottom half of the income distribution and increasingly superior, high-tech health care for families in the upper-income strata.
Consider a family headed by two income earners each with a gross wage base of $30,000. One might be a taxi driver, and the other a sales clerk in a department store or at, say, Home Depot.
It follows from this definition of gross wage base that it must support all of the health expenditures made by or on behalf of the family in a given year — that is, the employer's contribution to premiums for the employee's health insurance, the employee's own contribution and the employee's out-of-pocket health spending.By "gross wage base" is meant here the sum of all of the debits that an employer makes to the account "Payroll Expense" for an employee. It includes the employee's cash take-home pay, all the income taxes and Social Security taxes and other deductions – for example, the employee's contributions toward health insurance and pensions — withheld from the employee's paycheck, as well as the employer's share of Social Security taxes and the employer's contributions toward the employee's health insurance, pension, vacation pay, sick days and so on. It is a sum that supports all taxes paid by or on behalf of the employee and all fringe benefits earned by the employee, whether formally paid by the employer or taken out of the employee's paycheck.
According to the Milliman Medical Index, this total health spending figure for a typical non-elderly American family of four had reached an average of $15,600 by 2008. It had grown at an average compound growth rate of about 8.6 percent from $11,192 in 2004.
To return to our family with an assumed gross wage base of $60,000: If that gross wage base grew by, say, 3 percent per year over the next decade, to $80,600 by 2017, while total family health spending grew by, say, 8 percent per year over the same time frame, to $33,700 by 2017, then about 41 percent of the family's gross wage base would be taken up by health care alone, before any deductions for taxes or fringe benefits. If the wage base grew by 4 percent, health spending still would absorb about a third of the family gross wage base.
These numbers, which are realistic, suggest that before long the gross wage base earned by American households will become too small a donkey to carry the load of the family's spending on health care. It will put before Americans an uncomfortable choice.
It is one of the several unpleasant trade-offs facing President-elect Barack Obama.
Uwe E. Reinhardt is an economist at Princeton.
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/07/the-health-care-challenge-sailing-into-a-perfect-storm/
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Learn About The Candidates Through Public Records
Learn About The Candidates Through Public Records
October 10th, 2008 ·
With two presidential debates and the one and only vice presidential debate complete, are you satisfied with the information provided by the candidates? It has been a truly long and historic campaign season, but there is still a lot to know before November 4th.
As everyone is probably quite aware of at this point, the economy is in the dumps, billions of dollars are being spent on two wars, and the health care and educational systems are not up to the high standards worthy of a leading nation. So, this election could be one of the most important decisions of this generation.
One way to know where the candidates stands is by reviewing their policies and plans, which are often available on the candidates' web pages. However, if you want to dig a little deeper, looking into the past of the candidates may provide even more insight.John McCain, Sarah Palin, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden have all been under a pretty tight microscope, but sometimes knowing about someone's past and present lives can provide a glimpse into the type of person they are. I've found the public records are a great way to find out additional information about the candidates for president and vice president.
One of the great things about the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is that certain records are required to be made accessible by the general public. Through public records, you can find information as basic as contact information and as politically engaging as campaign finance reports.
Below is a list of some great resources available through public records:
Contact Information: Search government databases to find contact information for any office. You can use this to access web pages or perhaps put in a call to a political office. For example here you can send an email to Senator Joe Biden.
Campaign Finance Reports: Campaign finance reports address what avenues candidates receive donations from. You can view the names of contributors, dates of contributions, and amount. Campaign finance reports also show expenditures from a campaign.
Court Records: Are any of the candidates involved in litigation or were they involved in litigation in the past? Most court records are public records, and, where available, online searches can be performed by name.
Land Records: These public records allow you to view information about land or property owned by a candidate (or any other person of interest). You can often find out mortgage, owner, and property tax information.
The Free Public Records Directory provides access to all these public records, and more. You can choose the state where a candidate resides or is currently holding office (i.e.: Arizona, Alaska, Delaware, or Illinois), and then choose from a list of public records categories to search.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Social Security: John McCain's Alternate Universe
In the Social Security portion of John McCain's interview with Wolf Blitzer. And two key points stood out. First, McCain fabricated an alternative history of the 2005 Social Security battle in order to create a new tax talking points. According to McCain, and he repeated this again and again, "the [Social Security] talks broke down because the Democrats insisted as a precondition that we raise taxes." That's very weird. First, there were no Social Security talks. And the Democrats didn't make any demands to raise taxes. They didn't even propose raising taxes. As many of you know, I followed that debate extremely closely. And McCain just made this stuff out of whole cloth. Really bizarre. Second, Blitzer asked if McCain still would have favored President Bush's privatization plan, as he did in 2005, that we see how volatile the stock market it is. McCain repeatedly refused to answer the question and instead repeated the tax precondition fib. The key point -- after standing behind privatization as recently as a few weeks ago, now McCain refuses to say he still supports it.
The Electronic Voting Machine Glitches Begin - The Board Blog - NYTimes.com
The Electronic Voting Machine Glitches Begin - The Board Blog - NYTimes.com
"Voters in West Virginia, which is conducting early voting, are complaining that ES & S voting machines recorded votes for Democratic candidates as votes for Republicans.
Calvin Thomas of Ripley, a retired factory worker, said that when he tried to vote for Barack Obama, it registered the vote for John McCain. He said his daughter had the same problem.
They got an election worker to fix their ballots, but Mr. Thomas said he was worried other voters might not notice the problem.
In Tennessee, the problem seems to be the reverse. At least three voters complained that ES & S voting machines registered their votes for Mr. McCain as votes for Mr. Obama.
“Vote flipping,” as this glitch is known, is an acknowledged problem with electronic voting machines. It’s also pretty scary for anyone who cares about democracy.
West Virginia’s secretary of state asked localities to “recalibrate” their machines, and said the problem was then solved.
We believe the problem will be solved when voting is no longer done on electronic voting machines.
We favor paper ballots, counted by an optical scan reader. And when the paper ballots are counted, if the total is different from what the optical scan reader reports, the paper ballots’ total should be the official election result.
We also encourage voters to pay extra attention if they are voting on electronic machines."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
