Politics Plus

The Tax Capitulation Act was not debated in the House as scheduled today.  Democratic progressives, led by Oregon’s Peter DeFazio defected on a key procedural vote that would have prevented them from offering substantive amendments.  This ‘bipartisanship’ (see graphic) is killing us!

The bill to temporarily extend tax cuts and jobless benefits is on ice — for now — in the House.

House Democratic leaders have pulled the rules for debate, which first have to get approved before lawmakers can take up the tax legislation. A party caucus meeting is set for this afternoon.

Many liberals in the Democratic caucus are upset at the bill’s provision on estate taxes and want to amend the measure and send it back to the Senate. The problem is that Democrats would have to vote on the Senate-passed bill if they want to change the estate tax provision.

The deal worked out by President Obama and congressional Republicans would extend for two years tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003 for all income levels. Liberals such as Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., are upset that the extension includes families earing more than $250,000.

Under the bill, couples would be allowed to pass up to $10 million onto their heirs tax free. Estates above that would be taxed at 35%.

A deal is being worked out, according to DeFazio, that would allow liberals to offer an amendment that would change the estate-tax provision so that estates up to $7 million would be tax free for couples, with anything above that amount taxed at 45%.

That amendment also would include a plan by Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y., to get rid of the 2% cut in payroll taxes in the bill, which some opponents believe would undermine Social Security. It would be replaced by a new infusion of the "Making Work Pay" tax credit of up to $400 for individuals and $800 for families that Obama included in last year’s massive economic stimulus package. Also, liberal Democrats want to include a $250 relief payment to seniors… [emphasis added]

Inserted from <USA Today>

There is no longer a realistic hope to block the bonus tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires.  Recent polls indicate that majorities of Democrats, Independents, and Republicans all favor the co-called compromise.  Ironically, Obama has finally demonstrated that he can use the bully pulpit.  His timing could not have been worse.  In addition, they have bought the media spin that their taxes will go up, and are not willing to give up the cost of a muffler to keep the rich from getting the cost of a Mercedes.  How sad.

Big thanks to those House Democrats who continue to fight for us.  The Democratic Caucus remains behind closed doors as I write.

I have not spent much time covering the Wikileaks controversy, largely because I have had mixed feelings about it.  Governments need to have some secrets.  In his earliest releases, Assange could have done a better job of redacting the names of foreign nationals who have worked with the US.  Much of the material released has been merely embarrassing personally, having little bearing on improper conduct.  What difference does it make if the Premier of Oobadoobaland secretly likes to be spanked by gorillas?  On the other hand, there is no evidence that anyone has been harmed by the releases.  Our own Secretary of Defense claims that they are no threat to national security.  Some of the material has been most valuable in exposing government misconduct.  Most of all, many of the tactics used by the US to defame and censor Assange have been sufficiently overboard as to indicate a need for him.

The US Air Force has blocked access for computers on its network to at least 25 websites that published sensitive diplomatic documents released by the Internet site WikiLeaks, a spokeswoman said.

Major Toni Tones, a spokesperson at Air Force Space Command in Colorado, said on Tuesday that the websites that carried WikiLeaks documents had been blocked and could not be viewed by any Air Force computer.

The Air Force "routinely blocks Air Force network access to websites hosting inappropriate materials or malware (malicious software) and this includes any website that hosts classified materials and those that are released by WikiLeaks," Tones said.

She said the action was taken by the 24th Air Force, which is commanded by Major Generral Richard Webber and is responsible for cyber warfare and computer security for the service. The move was approved by Air Force lawyers, she said.

The Army and Navy say they have not taken similar actions.

‘Unfortunate’

"If a site has republished the documents, then we block it," she said, adding that the move to prevent access to the media sites was done recently. She said she was not sure of the date.

Tones said The New York Times is the only major US newspaper included in the ban… [emphasis added]

Inserted from <Common Dreams>

Frankly, the Times and other papers has performed a valuable service to the US by taking on the job of redacting the documents.

So there I was, leaning in favor of Wikileaks, but still not sure.  Then Keith Olbermann interviewed Michael Moore, and Moore’s arguments settled the matter for me.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Moore is right. “It’s not the leaks that are killing anyone.  It’s the secrets.”  He is also right that if a Wikileaks type organization had been there before the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, the authorization to use force in Iraq, or even 9/11, those tragedies might have been prevented.  Assange might not have done the best job.  He might not even be the best person to be doing it.  But he is the one who is doing it, and especially in light of Obama’s choice to ignore the transparency he promised, it is a job that desperately needs to be done.  The abuse of power through secrecy is a common thread running through our history.  That thread must be broken.

Republican obstruction has been the order of the day since Democrats took the Senate in 2006.  Last night, Rachel Maddow interviewed Sen. Tom Udall in her piece explaining how things are finally getting done, only because Democrats can keep the Senate in session until the day before the next session opens, and Republicans want to go home for the holidays.  She and Udall discusses the need for filibuster reform.  However, if one Republican has his way, it could turn Rachel’s premise on its ear and demonstrate the need for Senate rules reform going far beyond the filibuster problem.

First, here’s Rachel.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

To prevent the Senate from functioning, the Republicans have put Jim DeMint forward to be their Luddite of the week.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said the Senate would vote on Wednesday afternoon on beginning debate on the treaty. He indicated debate would run several days, with a final vote possible on Sunday.

Republican Senator Jim DeMint, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee who has threatened to use delaying tactics to try to block passage of the accord until the new year, indicated on Wednesday he might demand a full reading of the pact when it is introduced.

The treaty itself is only 17 pages but an accompanying protocol runs to 165 pages and three additional annexes add another 174. Democrats estimated it could take 12 to 15 hours to read the documents into the Senate record.

"This is a new low in putting political stunts ahead of our national security, and it is exactly the kind of Washington game-playing that the American people are sick of," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said in a statement… [emphasis added]

Inserted from <Reuters>

It’s not often that I agree with Gibbs, these days.  If DeMint follows through with this act of political terrorism, I hope that Reid and the Senate Democrats have the spine to keep the Senate in session until the work is done, but I’m not holding my breath.

I have often heard it argues that the US has the best system of justice anywhere in the world.  While I agree with that in theory, in practice it seems to work out that way all too infrequently.  The biggest cause for that is getting equal access to the system.  For the rich, that’s not a problem.  Most well heeled defendants get fair trials and many even beat the system, getting away with murder.  For the poor, it’s an altogether different story as a recent ACLU report reveals.

Poor defendants on death row, immigrants in unfair deportation proceedings, torture victims, domestic violence survivors and victims of racial discrimination – all these groups are consistently being denied access to justice while those responsible for the abuses are protected, according to a new report by the American Civil Liberties Union.

Jamil Dakwar, director of the ACLU Human Rights Programme, told IPS, "Access to justice is a fundamental human right and bedrock tenet of American democratic system – it was even codified by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which the U.S. championed 62 years ago."

"Unfortunately, access to the courts and effective remedy have been severely curtailed over the last decade, especially for those who need it most," he said. "It is time for our government and judiciary to recommit to respecting and promoting this essential right."

According to the report, "Slamming the Courthouse Doors", the "actions of the executive, federal legislative, and judicial branches of the United States government have seriously restricted access to justice for victims of civil liberties and human rights violations, and have limited the availability of effective (or, in some cases, any) remedies for these violations."

For example, the report details how individuals convicted of capital crimes who seek to present newly found evidence of their innocence or claims of serious constitutional violations are being denied recourse in the courts.

Federal legislation, most prominently the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA), and Supreme Court decisions, has greatly limited access to federal review of state court death penalty convictions, the report says. It also charges that victims of rape, assault, religious rights violations and other serious abuses in prison are having their claims thrown out of court because of a restrictive federal law.

Immigrants who may have legitimate claims to remain in the U.S. are unknowingly waiving their opportunity to pursue these claims and are being swiftly deported because of unfair procedures, the report charges.

It also notes that victims of domestic violence are being denied the opportunity to seek civil remedy under the Violence Against Women Act because of recent court decisions.

Similarly, victims of torture and "extraordinary rendition" have been denied their day in court.

The administration of President Barack Obama has sought to extinguish lawsuits brought by torture survivors through use of "judicially-created doctrines such as the so-called ‘state secrets’ privilege and qualified immunity to dismiss civil suits alleging torture, cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, forced disappearance, and arbitrary detention, without consideration on the merits," the report says.

It charges that by invoking the "state secrets" privilege, the Obama administration can not only restrict discovery but can quash an entire lawsuit – without demonstrating the validity of their claim to a judge. Immigrants also are systematically denied access to justice, as they face monumental obstacles to obtaining review of removal orders.

The U.S. government has claimed that there is no right to judicial review of diplomatic assurances when it has sought to transfer individuals to countries known to employ torture.

Federal immigration officials also have used a procedure known as stipulated removal to deport non-U.S. citizens without a hearing before an immigration judge. "There is a lack of meaningful safeguards to ensure people with mental disabilities facing possible deportation from the United States are afforded fair hearings. As a result, legal permanent residents and asylum seekers with a lawful basis for remaining in the United States may have been unfairly deported from the country because their mental disabilities made it impossible for them to effectively present their claims in court," the report says. The ACLU’s recommends that Congress amend the habeas-related provisions of AEDPA so that federal courts are more accessible to prisoners asserting claims of constitutional violations. It also urges the creation of and adequate funding for state defender organisations that are independent of the judiciary and that have sufficient resources to provide quality representation to indigent capital defendants.

Congress should pass legislation that creates procedures to prevent the abuse of the state secrets privilege, and the Obama administration should prohibit the reliance on "diplomatic assurances" to deport or otherwise transfer persons from the United States.

The ACLU also urged Congress to enact the End Racial Profiling Act, which would ban racial profiling and provide for government monitoring and documentation of racial profiling… [emphasis added]

Inserted from <Common Dreams>

In my volunteer work, I often see such abuses firsthand.  Reading this, I feel proud that I renewed my ACLU membership and encourage you to join.  Most of the abuses discussed here are direct consequences of the Republican Reich under GW ChickenHawk, but Obama, contrary to what he said in his campaign, has continued many abusive Republican policies to his great shame.