President Obama outlining $17 billion in budget cuts, this morning, calling for a new era of fiscal accountability as his administration fills out the details of his budget proposal.
"We can no longer afford to spend as if deficits do not matter and waste is not our problem," the President said, taking an implicit shot at his predecessor. "We can no longer afford to leave the hard choices for the next budget, the next administration--or the next generation."
Obama defended his cuts against Republican critics, who argue that $17 billion is just a drop in the bucket.
"That's a lot of money, even by Washington standards," Obama said.
The administration released the details of its budget today, outlining how much should be spent on specific programs. The full budget can be found here.
Obama pointed to a number of specific programs that will head to the chopping bock, including a Department of Education office in Paris, the National Literacy Institute, a new engine for the Joint Strike Fighter, and a long-range radio navigation system.
"This system once made a lot of sense, before there were satellites to help us navigate," the President said.
As Republican accuse the President of runaway spending, Obama replied that his administration will pare back on spending by the end of his first term.
"[B]y the end of my first term we will cut the deficit in half," he said. "Over the next decade we'll bring non-defense discretionary spending to its lowest level as a share of Gross Domestic Product since 1962."
No, this is not a re-post from earlier. For the seventh time, Rep. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) has introduced a "privileged resolution" asking for an ethics investigation into the relationship between earmarks and campaign contributions.
The resolution makes specific reference to a "raided firm," leaving little doubt that Flake's target is the now-defunct PMA Group, an appropriations lobbying group with close ties to Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) that was raided by the FBI in February.
No sooner did the House vote to table the motion last night than Flake re-introduced the same resolution.
Members of MoveOn.org are calling on Barack Obama to block the rewrite of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) since it includes immunity for telecom companies who took part in the White House's domestic warrantless wiretapping program.
In a letter sent out to members Saturday, MoveOn leaders urged the group's members to call Obama's office to help remind him that he has opposed immunity in the past.
"Last year, after phone calls from MoveOn members and others, Obama went so far as to vow to 'support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies,'" MoveOn's Political Action Team wrote in the letter. "We need him to honor that promise."
Obama has said that he supports the deal on FISA, reached between House Democrats and the White House. But Obama has also said that he'll fight to strip the immunity.
Read more of MoveOn's letter below.
Dear MoveOn member,
On Friday, House Democrats caved to the Bush administrationand passed a bill giving a get-out-of-jail-free card to phone companies that helped Bush illegally spy on innocent Americans.
This Monday, the fight moves to the Senate. Senator Russ Feingold says the "deal is not a compromise; it is a capitulation." Barack Obama announced his partial support for the bill, but said, "It does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses."
Last year, after phone calls from MoveOn members and others, Obama went so far as to vow to "support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies."4 We need him to honor that promise.
Can you call Senator Obama today and tell him you're counting on him to keep his word? Ask him to block any compromise that includes immunity for phone companies that helped Bush break the law.
...These companies helped the Bush Administration illegally spy on the emails and phone calls of innocent Americans. By giving "immunity" to these companies, all lawsuits brought against them by civil liberties groups would be thrown out of court. That means we may never find out how far Bush went in breaking the law. And once it's done, it can't be undone. That's why we need Obama to promise to block any bill that has immunity.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) explained that she supported the rewrite of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) because it provided civil liberties protections and a constraint on executive power, not because of the retroactive immunity it will give to telecom companies.
Pelosi said in a speech on the House floor Friday that the changes will help with gathering intelligence that's needed to keep troops safe and able to do their job.
"Good intelligence is necessary for us to know the plans of the terrorist and to defeat those plans," she said. "So we can't go without a bill. That's just simply not an option. But to have a bill we must have a bill that does not violate the Constitution of the United States and this bill does not. "
She also added that the bill increases congressional oversight and transparency of intelligence gathering and makes clear that a president does not have the constitutional authority to alter FISA requirements. President Bush had argued he had the constitutional right to conduct his domestic warrantless wiretapping program.
"[W]hat this bill reaffirms is that the FISA law is the authority for collecting foreign intelligence," Pelosi said. "There is no inherent authority of the president to do whatever he wants. This is a democracy; it is not a monarchy."
The bill passed the House, 293 to 193. The Senate is expected to take up the bill next week.
Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) are taking criticism from liberal activists, who have said that the White House got the better end of the deal. The critics had hoped that the Democratic leadership would not grant the companies immunity from lawsuits for participating in President Bush's domestic warrantless wiretapping program.
Pelosi said in her speech that she disagreed with the immunity provisions in the bill. Under the legislation, companies who participated in the wiretapping program will be exempt from lawsuits if a federal district judge determines that the Bush administration gave written directives to the companies authorizing them to engage in the wiretaps.
"Those companies have not lived up to the standards expected by the American people," she said. "I don't think today is any cause of celebration for them. They come out of this with a taint."
She added, however, that she didn't believe the lawsuits would have achieved their aim, "which is to learn the truth about the President's Terrorist Surveillance Program and give us the information we need to make sure that never happens again."
Instead, she believes a report on the program by the inspector general will uncover that information.
President Bush on Friday praised a deal reached in the Democratic-led House to update the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and the House's approval of funding for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Bush said the FISA update will both help intelligence agencies monitor terror activities and protect civil liberties. The compromise, reached Thursday, includes a way for telecom companies who took part in the president's domestic wiretapping program to obtain immunity from lawsuits. Most Democrats had opposed retroactive immunity.
"My Director of National Intelligence and the Attorney General tells me that this is a good bill," Bush said. "It will help our intelligence professionals learn our enemies' plans for new attacks. It ensures that those companies whose assistance is necessary to protect the country will themselves be protected from liability for past or future cooperation with the government."
The House is scheduled to vote on the measure Friday.
The House also approved a $162 billion war funding bill on Thursday. Bush called it a "responsible" bill that will provide "vital resources" to those on the front lines.
"This legislation gives our troops the funds they need to prevail without tying the hands of our commanders in the field or imposing artificial timetables for withdrawal," he said.
The bill also guarantees money for troops to attend a public university, a measure that was championed by Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.). Bush and Republican presidential candidate John McCain had offered their own education benefits package, but Webb's proposal gained more bipartisan support.
Senate Democrats slammed the compromise reached by House Democratic leaders and the White House over an update to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).
The deal provides an opportunity for telecom companies who participated in Bush administration's domestic warrantless wiretapping program to earn immunity from lawsuits.
Here's Sen. Russ Feingold's (D-Wis.) statement:
The proposed FISA deal is not a compromise; it is a capitulation. The House and Senate should not be taking up this bill, which effectively guarantees immunity for telecom companies alleged to have participated in the Presidents illegal program, and which fails to protect the privacy of law-abiding Americans at home. Allowing courts to review the question of immunity is meaningless when the same legislation essentially requires the court to grant immunity. And under this bill, the government can still sweep up and keep the international communications of innocent Americans in the U.S. with no connection to suspected terrorists, with very few safeguards to protect against abuse of this power. Instead of cutting bad deals on both FISA and funding for the war in Iraq, Democrats should be standing up to the flawed and dangerous policies of this administration.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said they were unhappy with the immunity provisions, but they added that the bill is likely to pass the Senate.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) also knocked the deal, calling it a "thinly-veiled giveaway to major campaign donors." It reserved special criticism for House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), who was key in negotiations with Republicans who were calling for telecom immunity.
"The Hoyer/Bush surveillance deal was clearly written with the telephone companies and internet providers at the table and for their benefit," said Caroline Frederickson, director ACLU's Washington Legislative Office. "They wanted immunity, and this bill gives it to them."
Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) is calling on Congress to ban the Department of Defense (DoD) from using tax money to fund "propaganda."
Kerry, along with fellow Democratic Sens. Byron Dorgan (N.D.), Bob Menendez (N.Y.), and Frank Lautenberg (N.Y.), is planning to introduce a companion bill to House legislation instituting such a ban, Kerry's office said today. The House version, introduced by Rep. Paul Hodes (D-N.H.), was included in the 2009 Defense authorization bill.
The bill defines propaganda as "any form of communication in support of national objectives designed to influence the opinions, emotions, attitudes, or behavior of the people of the United States in order to benefit the sponsor, either directly or indirectly."
Prompted by the influential New York Timesstory, in April Kerry called for a Government Accountability Office investigation into the Pentagon's placement of military analysts on U.S. news networks leading up to the Iraq war.
Sometimes, the most effective approach to getting detainees to talk isn't the most obvious one, Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) reminded his colleagues Wednesday.
In arguing against a Democratic measure that would prohibit contractors from detainee operations, Hunter recalled witnessing an unlikely contractor's effective interrogation.
"It was an older lady reading a children's book to a detainee. And I said, 'You've gotta be kidding me. You know, I expected all the classic stuff like we see in the movies,'" Hunter said on the House floor.
He continued: "If you've got somebody that you can contract with that can walk into a room and walk out maybe two days later, maybe eight days later, maybe six months later, with information that will save lives of your troops and advance a mission, who cares if that's an elderly lady who happens to be a civilian and may not want to join the Army."
Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), somewhat surprised by Hunter's anecdote, responded, "Make her an offer she can't refuse if she's that good."
The Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN) tomorrow will launch a tour through California, Nevada, and Colorado in opposition of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy for gay and lesbian servicemembers. The tour will start in San Diego, then will proceed to Las Vegas, Denver, and Palm Springs.
Most Viewed RSS Feed »
