TAMPA - Inspired by peers and hoping to attract top professionals, the University of South Florida's faculty union is finding success pushing for domestic partner benefits.

An agreement signed Thursday by chief negotiators for the university and the union states that both sides agree to pursue health-care options for gay, lesbian and unmarried heterosexual couples.

More at http://www.tbo.com/news/metro/MGBKEOSGZIE.html
See the full article

January 26, 2006
Editorial
Senators in Need of a Spine

Judge Samuel Alito Jr., whose entire history suggests that he holds extreme views about the expansive powers of the presidency and the limited role of Congress, will almost certainly be a Supreme Court justice soon. His elevation will come courtesy of a president whose grandiose vision of his own powers threatens to undermine the nation's basic philosophy of government — and a Senate that seems eager to cooperate by rolling over and playing dead.

It is hard to imagine a moment when it would be more appropriate for senators to fight for a principle. Even a losing battle would draw the public's attention to the import of this nomination.

At the Judiciary Committee hearings, the judge followed the well-worn path to confirmation, which has the nominee offer up only the most boring statements and unarguable truisms: the president is not above the law; diversity in college student bodies is a good thing. But in what he has said in the past, and what he refused to say in the hearings, Judge Alito raised warning flags that, in the current political context, cannot simply be shrugged away with a promise to fight again another day.

The Alito nomination has been discussed largely in the context of his opposition to abortion rights, and if the hearings provided any serious insight at all into the nominee's intentions, it was that he has never changed his early convictions on that point. The judge — who long maintained that Roe v. Wade should be overturned — ignored all the efforts by the Judiciary Committee's chairman, Arlen Specter, to get him to provide some cover for pro-choice senators who wanted to support the nomination. As it stands, it is indefensible for Mr. Specter or any other senator who has promised constituents to protect a woman's right to an abortion to turn around and hand Judge Alito a potent vote to undermine or even end it.

But portraying the Alito nomination as just another volley in the culture wars vastly underestimates its significance. The judge's record strongly suggests that he is an eager lieutenant in the ranks of the conservative theorists who ignore our system of checks and balances, elevating the presidency over everything else. He has expressed little enthusiasm for restrictions on presidential power and has espoused the peculiar argument that a president's intent in signing a bill is just as important as the intent of Congress in writing it. This would be worrisome at any time, but it takes on far more significance now, when the Bush administration seems determined to use the cover of the "war on terror" and presidential privilege to ignore every restraint, from the Constitution to Congressional demands for information.

There was nothing that Judge Alito said in his hearings that gave any comfort to those of us who wonder whether the new Roberts court will follow precedent and continue to affirm, for instance, that a man the president labels an "unlawful enemy combatant" has the basic right to challenge the government's ability to hold him in detention forever without explanation. His much-quoted statement that the president is not above the law is meaningless unless he also believes that the law requires the chief executive to defer to Congress and the courts.

Judge Alito's refusal to even pretend to sound like a moderate was telling because it would have cost him so little. Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., who was far more skillful at appearing mainstream at the hearings, has already given indications that whatever he said about the limits of executive power when he was questioned by the Senate has little practical impact on how he will rule now that he has a lifetime appointment.

Senate Democrats, who presented a united front against the nomination of Judge Alito in the Judiciary Committee, seem unwilling to risk the public criticism that might come with a filibuster — particularly since there is very little chance it would work. Judge Alito's supporters would almost certainly be able to muster the 60 senators necessary to put the nomination to a final vote.

A filibuster is a radical tool. It's easy to see why Democrats are frightened of it. But from our perspective, there are some things far more frightening. One of them is Samuel Alito on the Supreme Court.
See the full article

A Eugene, OR Register-Guard Editorial
Published: Sunday, January 22, 2006

For many of Lane County's 54,000 Medicare beneficiaries and the beleaguered pharmacists trying to serve them, the new Part D prescription drug plan has been a disaster from Day One.

Frail senior citizens waited in lines for hours trying to fill prescriptions for vital medications only to be told their names weren't in the computer, or they were going to have to pay more out-of-pocket than they ever had before, or their medications weren't covered under the plans in which they had been automatically enrolled.

Many begged their pharmacists for help. They asked if they could borrow the unexpected cash deductibles they were now being charged. Others left in tears after failing to get through on jammed phone lines to anyone who could confirm their coverage.

And the pharmacists did help. They gave people drugs without verification of coverage or payment of deductibles. But then a hundred problems turned into a thousand problems, and before long, 10,000 Oregonians were engulfed in a health care crisis because they couldn't get their prescriptions filled.

Gov. Ted Kulongoski had to intervene with an emergency plan. He ordered the state to reimburse pharmacies for providing up to 30 days' worth of medications to patients who weren't showing up on computer records as being enrolled in the new drug plan or as qualifying for low-income discounts.

Kulongoski joined governors from at least 25 other states who've asked for federal reimbursement of the emergency drug funding. They shouldn't have to ask. This is entirely a federal fiasco, and states should be held harmless.

Remember, Mark McClellan promised a "seamless transition" to the new program. McClellan, chief of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, has done a heckuva job managing that transition.

The meltdown is so serious nationwide that the Bush administration had to order the private Medicare drug plan carriers to cover an emergency 30-day refill of prescriptions and cap co-pays for low-income seniors at $5. These are the same insurance companies that joined the pharmaceutical industry in showering Congress with cash to make sure their interests were protected when the prescription drug program was being created. Looks like the only losers are the low-income seniors the program was designed to help.

Don't forget the ugly history of this deeply flawed legislation. It never would have passed if the White House hadn't deliberately deceived Congress in 2003 about the true cost of the drug plan, insisting it wouldn't exceed $400 billion over 10 years. Key Republicans balked at anything that would cost more than that.

Then an armada of lobbyists spent a combined $141 million to ensure that the new drug benefit would primarily benefit private companies. The record number of pharmaceutical, HMO and managed care industry lobbyists - almost 1,000 all told - made sure the language of the new law would expressly prohibit the government from using its bargaining clout to negotiate lower prices and would also ban the reimportation of cheaper drugs from Canada.

Comptroller General David Walker called the drug plan "one of the largest unfunded liabilities ever undertaken by the U.S. government." It's expected to cost the federal government about $728 billion over the next 10 years, a total that is higher than the annual gross domestic products of Sweden, Egypt and Portugal - combined.

In addition to fixing the problems that led to its horrendous debut, Congress needs to revisit the entire prescription drug program. It's hopelessly complex and utterly unaffordable in its present form.

A no-brainer first step would be to immediately pass the bill co-authored by Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, that gives Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt authority to negotiate lower prices for drug purchases through Medicare.
See the full article

Democrats can't get Republicans in Congress to investigate

By Larry Margasak, Associated Press Writer | January 22, 2006

WASHINGTON --Troops and civilians at a U.S. military base in Iraq were exposed to contaminated water last year and employees for the responsible contractor, Halliburton, couldn't get their company to inform camp residents, according to interviews and internal company documents.

Halliburton, the company formerly headed by Vice President Dick Cheney, disputes the allegations about water problems at Camp Junction City, in Ramadi, even though they were made by its own employees and documented in company e-mails.

"We exposed a base camp population (military and civilian) to a water source that was not treated," said a July 15, 2005, memo written by William Granger, the official for Halliburton's KBR subsidiary who was in charge of water quality in Iraq and Kuwait.

"The level of contamination was roughly 2x the normal contamination of untreated water from the Euphrates River," Granger wrote in one of several documents. The Associated Press obtained the documents from Senate Democrats who are holding a public inquiry into the allegations Monday.

Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., who will chair the session, held a number of similar inquiries last year on contracting abuses in Iraq. He said Democrats were acting on their own because they had not been able to persuade Republican committee chairmen to investigate.

The company's former water treatment expert at Camp Junction City said that he discovered the problem last March, a statement confirmed by his e-mail the day after he tested the water.

While bottled water was available for drinking, the contaminated water was used for virtually everything else, including handwashing, laundry, bathing and making coffee, said water expert Ben Carter of Cedar City, Utah.

Another former Halliburton employee who worked at the base, Ken May of Louisville, said there were numerous instances of diarrhea and stomach cramps -- problems he also suffered.

A spokeswoman for Halliburton said its own inspection found neither contaminated water nor medical evidence to substantiate reports of illnesses at the base. The company now operates its own water treatment plant there, spokeswoman Melissa Norcross said.

A military medical unit that visited Camp Ramadi in mid-April found nothing out of the ordinary in terms of water quality, said Marine Corps Maj. Tim Keefe, a military spokesman. Water-quality testing records from May 23 show the water within normal parameters, he said.

"The allegations appear not to have merit," Keefe said.

Halliburton has contracts to provide a number of services to U.S. forces in Iraq and was responsible for the water quality at the base in Ramadi.

Granger's July 15 memo said the exposure had gone on for "possibly a year" and added, "I am not sure if any attempt to notify the exposed population was ever made."

The first memo on the problem -- written by Carter to Halliburton officials on March 24, 2005 -- was an "incident report" from tests Carter performed the previous day.

"It is my opinion that the water source is without question contaminated with numerous micro-organisms, including Coliform bacteria," Carter wrote. "There is little doubt that raw sewage is routinely dumped upstream of intake much less than the required 2 mile distance.

"Therefore, it is my conclusion that chlorination of our water tanks while certainly beneficial is not sufficient protection from parasitic exposure."

Carter said he resigned in early April after Halliburton officials did not take any action to inform the camp population.

The water expert said he told company officials at the base that they would have to notify the military. "They told me it was none of my concern and to keep my mouth shut," he said.

On at least one occasion, Carter said, he spoke to the chief military surgeon at the base, asking him whether he was aware of stomach problems afflicting people. He said the surgeon told him he would look into it.

"They brushed it under the carpet," Carter said. "I told everyone, 'Don't take showers, use bottled water."

A July 14, 2005, memo showed that Halliburton's public relations department knew of the problem.

"I don't want to turn it into a big issue right now," staff member Jennifer Dellinger wrote in the memo, "but if we end up getting some media calls I want to make sure we have all the facts so we are ready to respond."

Halliburton's performance in Iraq has been criticized in a number of military audits, and congressional Democrats have contended that the Bush administration has favored the company with noncompetitive contracts.
See the full article

By Matthew Mosk and John Wagner
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, January 21, 2006; Page A01

A Baltimore judge ruled yesterday that Maryland's law banning same-sex marriage is discriminatory and "cannot withstand constitutional challenge," throwing open the possibility of a bruising legislative battle over a constitutional amendment.

Unlike decisions in Massachusetts and New York state, the Maryland ruling will not immediately bring lines of same-sex couples to city hall for civil ceremonies. Circuit Court Judge M. Brooke Murdock immediately stayed her decision, and the attorney general's office has voiced plans for an appeal.

Nevertheless, the judge's decision thrilled the 19 gay men and lesbians who filed suit last year after being denied marriage licenses in courthouses across the state. They challenged a 1973 state statute that defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
"It really is exciting," said Dave Kolesar, 28, an engineer at the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory and one of the plaintiffs, who said he was bowled over by the victory. "I wasn't ready, mentally, for success."

The effect of the ruling could be far more immediate in how it alters Maryland's political landscape. The decision comes during the state's contentious 2006 campaigns for governor and U.S. Senate. And it lands as the Maryland General Assembly's 90-day session has just gotten underway.

Although Democratic leaders who control both chambers have not embraced gay marriage, they signaled strong resistance yesterday to a constitutional ban. Those opposing same-sex unions vowed to force the issue to the top of the legislature's agenda.

"The evidence is now on the table. We must pass a constitutional amendment," said Del. Donald H. Dwyer Jr. (R-Anne Arundel). "This issue is not for the courts to decide."

Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. (R) expressed dismay with the court at an afternoon news conference. He hinted that he would get behind a drive to amend the constitution, saying he would "take the appropriate steps to protect marriage."

"Obviously, I'm disappointed," Ehrlich said. "Again, Maryland is in the national limelight, and it's not positive."

Eighteen states define marriage in their constitutions, many in amendments approved since 2003, when a Massachusetts court opened the door to same-sex marriages there, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Massachusetts is the only state that issues marriage licenses to same-sex couples, though Vermont and Connecticut recognize civil unions. Four states, the District and several dozen localities allow couples to formalize relationships through domestic-partnership registries.

The Virginia House of Delegates has approved a constitutional amendment that would bar same-sex marriages. If approved in the Senate, the measure would appear on the ballot in November.

In the long-awaited 20-page Maryland court ruling, Murdock took the position that banning same-sex marriage was no less discriminatory than outlawing interracial marriage, saying that "although traditions and values are important, they cannot be given so much weight that they alone will justify a discriminatory statutory classification."

Advocates for gay rights hailed the ruling as a significant landmark. "Truly, a historic moment," said Dan Furmansky, executive director of Equality Maryland.

Yesterday afternoon, Gita Deane, 42, and Lisa Polyak, 44, partners for a quarter-century who are raising two daughters and are lead plaintiffs in the lawsuit, sat together in their comfortable living room in north Baltimore, finishing each other's sentences. Deane held a cup of tea in both hands and savored the stillness and the goodness of the moment.

But they know this is just a pause in the challenge they accepted when they became a couple so many years ago -- a connection that has been questioned by many authorities along the way: the doctor who ejected Polyak from the delivery room as Deane gave birth; the immigration official who separated Deane from Polyak and their daughters as the little girls looked on, confused and frightened.

"I feel relieved," Deane said quietly. "People listened. They realized our family needed the protections that other families have."

Others, though, criticized the court ruling as a step toward eroding marriage and family. "My concern is legalizing same-sex unions teaches a society that marriage is only about fulfilling sexual and emotional desires," said the Rev. Eric Redmond of Hillcrest Baptist Church in Temple Hills. "I think homosexuals can have equal civil rights . . . without altering the historic definition of marriage."

Lawmakers in Annapolis who have long advocated for gay rights said the ruling was just the first step. "Hold the corks in the bottles," Del. Maggie L. McIntosh (D-Baltimore) said. "We're still a long way from a final decision."

McIntosh said Democrats recognize that the ruling unleashes the politically combustible issue into a legislative environment fraught with partisan tension.

Even before the ruling yesterday, House Democrats took steps to try to prevent a constitutional ban from reaching a vote on the floor. House leaders made a technical change in procedural rules Thursday, over the objections of Republicans. Residual resentment from that move spilled into yesterday's floor session.

Minority Whip Anthony J. O'Donnell (R-Calvert) admonished his Democratic colleagues for what he said was an attempt to shield them from casting a tough vote in an election year. "We should not fear having a debate," he said.

Yesterday, House and Senate leaders met to discuss how to deal with the issue. Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr. (D-Calvert) and House Speaker Michael E. Busch (D-Anne Arundel) have cast votes supporting the 1973 law against same-sex marriage.

But both also took the position that a constitutional amendment would be premature, because yesterday's ruling came from a single Circuit Court judge, not from the state's precedent-setting high court.

Sen. Brian E. Frosh (D-Montgomery), who chairs the Senate committee that would have to approve an amendment for it to advance, said he saw no reason to act before the Court of Appeals has ruled. "One Circuit Court judge's opinion is not cause for amending the constitution," Frosh said.

Political strategists said Ehrlich and Democrats in the legislature probably have recognized the potential for a ballot initiative to provide the governor with a significant political edge as he seeks reelection. Republican political consultant Kevin Igoe said the ruling was like "waving a red flag at a bull" for Ehrlich's conservative base. If the issue appears on a ballot, he said, it would almost certainly drive up GOP turnout.

For the issue to make the ballot, though, three-fifths of lawmakers must approve it, a prospect that is doubtful. Maryland law does not allow citizens to petition measures directly onto the ballot.

The two leading Democratic gubernatorial candidates showed no sign they would embrace the court ruling. In a statement, Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley affirmed his belief that marriage should be between a man and woman, but he said he supports legislative steps to broaden health care decision-making rights for same-sex couples.

Montgomery County Executive Douglas M. Duncan issued a statement touting his past support for expanded rights. Although he has opposed same-sex marriage in the past, his statement yesterday was silent on the subject. .

Deane and Polyak acknowledged feeling anxious about where the issue is headed as they waited for their daughters to come home from school.

"I worry about what the General Assembly is going to do with this decision," Polyak said hesitantly. "That it will be used to make political hay at the expense of our families. I hope that doesn't happen."
See the full article

By NEELA BANERJEE, NY Times
Published: January 21, 2006

ATLANTA, Jan. 20 - About 150 African-American ministers and gay activists from around the country gathered here Friday to begin a two-day conference to combat what they assert is widespread prejudice against gay men and lesbians within black churches.

Though most black Christians are liberal on pocketbook issues, they are social conservatives, speakers at the conference said. Yet getting black churches to accept gay men and lesbians has gained particular urgency over the last two years, participants noted.

The high rate of H.I.V. infection among blacks stems in part, they said, from the unwillingness of black ministers to discuss sexuality. They contended that the Republican Party and white evangelical Christians attracted a small but significant number of black votes in the 2004 presidential election by arguing for a nationwide ban on same-sex marriage and appealing to their conservative mores.

"In 2004, the religious right was concerned about re-electing George W. Bush," said the Rev. Al Sharpton, who spoke at the conference held here at First Iconium Baptist Church. "They couldn't come to black churches to talk about the war, about health care, about poverty. So they did what they always do and reached for the bigotry against gay and lesbian people."

Ministers at the conference and some of their critics at other black churches agreed that getting black churches to embrace openly gay individuals would be a tough fight.

Conservative black ministers in Atlanta have so far not taken up invitations to discuss attitudes toward gay men and lesbians, said the Rev. Kenneth L. Samuel, pastor of Victory Church in nearby Stone Mountain. Moreover, ministers who are willing to preach acceptance of gay men and lesbians stand to lose many parishioners, Dr. Samuel and others said.

"This is a learning experience, and it has not been without costs," the Rev. Timothy McDonald, pastor of First Iconium, said of his decision to be host of the conference, organized by the National Black Justice Coalition, an advocacy group for gay men and lesbians based in Washington. "Have we gotten nasty phone calls? Yes. Do I have the marks to show for it? Yes. But I think Jesus took some unpopular stances, too."

Through 2004 and early 2005, black evangelical ministers worked with their white counterparts to muster support for a ban on same-sex marriage. That campaign's momentum may be flagging somewhat because of inaction by Congress and the president on a constitutional amendment to prohibit the unions, said Bishop Harry R. Jackson Jr., a proponent of the ban and pastor of Hope Christian Church in College Park, Md.

Still, black preachers like Mr. Jackson are crisscrossing the country, trying to draw more black members of the clergy to their cause.

This week, the Rev. Ken Hutcherson, pastor of the evangelical Antioch Bible Church in Redmond, Wash., raised the possibility of boycotts of companies like Microsoft, Nike and Boeing for their support of legislation in Washington State prohibiting discrimination in housing, employment and insurance on the basis of sexual orientation.

Last year, Microsoft edged away from its support of the bill, a move for which Mr. Hutcherson took credit. Then, weeks later it reversed course again and backed the bill.

In his speech at the Atlanta conference, Mr. Sharpton implied that African-American clergy members who accept gay men and lesbians might have let crucial black votes go to the Republican Party in 2004 because of their unwillingness to confront conservatives in their midst. Ministers who do speak out may pay a steep price, if the experience of Dr. Samuel of Victory Church is any indication.

When Dr. Samuel began to preach forcefully on the acceptance of gay men and lesbians two years ago to his mostly African-American congregation, 1,000 of his approximately 5,000 parishioners left in protest. Their departure dealt a blow to Victory Church's finances, and for a time, its morale, but the church remains large by any standard. Pastors of smaller churches may be less inclined to preach tolerance in the face of such costs, ministers said.

The divisions among black Christians over homosexuality seem largely the same as those among other Christians. Conservative Christians of any race, many of whom call homosexuality an abomination as defined by the Bible, consider being gay a choice or a lifestyle.

Others say that sexual orientation is innate, and therefore gay men and lesbians are equally God's children. They also caution blacks against using the Bible to perpetuate injustice against gay Americans, recalling that whites used Scripture in the 19th century to defend slavery.

The discussion over sexuality becomes particularly fraught among African-Americans because of their history of oppression, ministers said. Blacks often bridle at comparisons made between the civil rights struggle of African-Americans and the campaign by gay men and lesbians for equal protection under the law.

Some blacks are also loath to accept gay men and lesbians in their midst because the sexuality of African-Americans has been stereotyped as promiscuous and unhealthy, said Alton Pollard III, director of black church studies at the Candler School of Theology at Emory University.

"I don't think that black people are more homophobic than anyone else," Dr. Pollard said, "but blacks have been stigmatized for so long as sexual beings that any discussion of homosexuality causes even greater discomfort."

Ministers and organizers of the conference said the next step would be for attendees to meet with clergy members, friends and family and begin a discussion of homosexuality at their churches. Yet even if that were to occur, some participants said they expected little to change soon.

Akbar Imhotep, a member of the African Methodist Episcopal Church attending the conference who is considering ordination, said, "I just feel that the day is a long time in coming when a man and a man and their children can walk into an A.M.E. church and they will be welcomed."
See the full article

Jan. 12, 2006, 8:39PM

If we can beat mob, we can fight DeLay-style politics

Experience in Las Vegas similar to D.C. corruption

By SEN. HARRY REID

In 1977, I was appointed chairman of the Nevada Gaming Commission. It was a difficult time for the gaming industry and Las Vegas, which were being overrun by organized crime. To that point in my life, I had served in the Nevada Assembly and even as lieutenant governor, but nothing prepared me for my fight with the mob.

Over the next few years, there would be threats on my life, bribes, FBI stings and even a car bomb placed in my family's station wagon. It was a terrifying experience, but at the end of the day, we cleaned up Las Vegas and ushered in a new era of responsibility.

My term on the gaming commission came to an end in 1981, and when it did, I thought I had seen such corruption for the last time. Unfortunately, that has not been the case. It is not quite the mafia of Las Vegas in the 1970s, but what is happening today in Washington is every bit as corrupt and the consequences for our country have been severe.

Our nation's capital has been overrun by organized crime - Tom DeLay-style.

The gangsters are the lobbyists, cronies and lawmakers who have banded together and abused their power to serve their own self-interest. The casinos are the Capitol, which has had its doors thrown open for special interests to waltz in and help themselves, and the victims, of course, are the American people.

There is a price to pay for the culture of corruption, and we can see it in the state of our union.

Consider the state of our economy. On one side is Big Oil, which reaped $100 billion in profits in 2005. On the other side are middle-class families. Their wages are declining at the same time they are paying more for gas, heat, education and other needs.

Take the state of health care. On one side are the HMOs that benefited greatly from a $10 billion slush fund in the Medicare bill. On the other side are seniors who face gaps in their coverage and the high cost of prescription drugs.

And then there is our national debt. On one side are the special interests and the multimillionaires who have received tremendous tax breaks over the last five years. On the other side are our children and grandchildren who will pay for these tax cuts when they inherit billions in debt.

In our country today, we are seeing what happens when lawmakers and lobbyists conspire to put the needs of special interests before the needs of the American people. We have a country that grows more dependent on foreign oil each day. We have cronyism like that exposed by Hurricane Katrina, and we have a national security policy that does a good job of protecting Halliburton's bottom-line but not a good enough job protecting the American people.

I believe that together, America can do better. We can have a government that puts the American people — not special interests — first, and it all starts with cleaning up Washington.

Honest leadership should not be a partisan goal. It is the key to a stronger union. When leaders put America's interests ahead of their own self-interest, there is no limit to how far America can go. We can make progress is so many areas, including energy independence, affordable health care, retirement security and tax-relief for the middle class.

In 2006, it is time to make sure lawmakers always put progress before politics. This will require some painful but necessary steps designed to root out corruption and cronyism in our government and to put an end to the quid-pro-quo politics that gave rise to Jack Abramoff.

Our first order of business must be reinvigorating the enforcement of government ethics rules so that people know there are consequences for breaking the law. Second, we must fix the revolving door that shuffles officials and staff between government and K Street.

Third, we must reform the gift and travel rules that fostered pay-to-play politics like we've seen in the Abramoff affair and the K Street project.

Finally, we must shine a bright light on the relationship between lobbyists and lawmakers. We need disclosure rules that will tell constituents who their lawmakers are meeting with, what lobbyists are asking for and what gifts and perks they are giving.

I support these steps not because they are good politics in an election year but because they are the right steps to take in response to the corruption we have seen in Washington. I know there are some people who think cleaning up Washington is a lost cause and that corruption and government will always go hand in hand. To these individuals, I say you are wrong.

If we could kick the mob out of Las Vegas in the 1970s, we can change the culture of Washington and give America a government as good and honest as the people it serves.

Reid, D-Nev., is the Senate minority leader.
See the full article

Florida Republican Party Donates $150,000 to Anti-Gay Activists

Thursday, January 12, 2006

Washington, DC - Today, the National Stonewall Democrats heavily criticized the Florida Republican Party for bankrolling an anti-gay organization seeking to place an amendment to bar marriage recognition for same-sex couples on a November 2006 statewide ballot. According to an investigative report in the St. Petersburg Times, of the $193,000 that has been raised by Florida4Marriage.org, $150,000 came from a single donation by the Florida Republican Party.

"The corruption of the Republican Party is failing to convince voters to support their candidates, so they are turning to controversial activist groups to push unnecessary initiatives in an attempt to scare individuals in the electoral fringe into voting," said Eric Stern, NSD Executive Director. "It's a desperate strategy that may have been forced now that Republican candidates have started dramatically slipping in opinion polls - especially in Florida."

Florida Republican Party Executive Director Andy Palmer told the Times that it made the donation because the party believed that similar ballot measures helped to increase the Republican vote in battleground states during the 2004 elections. Palmer also noted that the party made the donation because the ballot measure was "totally in line with the Republican Party philosophy." His statements echoed comments made in 2004 by the Republican Secretary of State for Ohio, Kenneth Blackwell, who told reporters that members of the Bush White House and reelection campaign urged him to campaign for a similar measure in order to boost turnout for the Bush/Cheney ticket.

According to the report, the Florida Republican Party approached the struggling organization with the unsolicited gift, which was made in the final three months of 2005, according to the party's financial reports. "I'm not at liberty to discuss the details, but they came to us and gave us the money," Florida4Marriage.org chairman John Stemberger told the newspaper.

"Voters should be weary of these stealth tactics used by the Republican Party both nationally and here in Florida," said Michael Albetta, President of the Florida GLBT Democratic Caucus, an official caucus of the Florida Democratic Party representing more than 10 GLBT Democratic chapters across the state. "Republicans fear a Democratic trend in this state, and they are attempting to force measures like these as a substitute for productive policies."

Florida4Marriage.org has so far fallen far short of the benchmarks needed to place such an initiative on the November ballot. Of the 600,000 petition signatures required to be verified by the state of Florida by February 01, it has collected only 250,000. "It is clear we are not where we want to be," Stemberger told the Times.

Congressman Jim Davis and State Senator Rod Smith, both Democratic candidates for Florida Governor, have opposed the proposed amendment to the state constitution. Both candidates first made their opposition public in 2005 at meetings organized by the Florida GLBT Democratic Caucus, and reiterated their opposition to Stonewall members this December during meetings with the caucus and the National Stonewall Democrats.

The Florida GLBT Democratic Caucus is an affiliate of the National Stonewall Democrats.

------

National Stonewall Democrats is the only national organization of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender Democrats, with more than 90 local chapters across the nation. NSD is committed to working through the Democratic Party to advance the rights of all people regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.
See the full article

Florida Governor's Race a Toss-Up
Survey of 800 Likely Voters January 3, 2005 Election 2006 Florida Governor Charlie Crist (R) 36% Jim Davis (D) 35% RasmussenReports.com Election 2006 Florida Governor Tom Gallagher (R) 37% Jim Davis (D) 37% RasmussenReports.com Election 2006 Florida Governor Charlie Crist (R) 40% Rod Smith (D) 35% RasmussenReports.com Election 2006 Florida Governor Tom Gallagher (R) 36% Rod Smith (D) 35% RasmussenReports.com

See the full article

A recent national poll from Hamilton College and Zogby International highlights what we already knew--that America's youth of today have full acceptance for their peers, despite who they might love.

"Among the poll's findings: Three quarters of this year's high school seniors favor legal recognition of same-sex relationships, either as marriage or civil union; three in four seniors oppose a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage; and 63% support adoptions by gay couples."

We look to the future with hope as this generation grows up to be the leaders and decision makers of tomorrow. However, we must never forget that the gay community will continue to be used by the Republican Party and antigay religious organizations to raise money, win elections and manipulate the public.

Read more from Phillip Perry
See the full article

In all corners of America, from rural states to urban states, from red states to blue states, Senate Republicans just have not been able to recruit competitive candidates to challenge Democratic incumbents. In the last month alone, Republicans in West Virginia, North Dakota and Wisconsin have decided that losing a statewide campaign just isn't worth their time and effort now that the tide is turning so strongly toward Democrats in 2006.

WVA: Despite Pleas from NRSC, Capito Said NO to WV Senate Bid. This week, Congresswoman Shelley Moore Capito announced she will not challenge Sen. Robert Byrd next year, "dealing a major blow" to Republican recruitment efforts in West Virginia. Political analyst Larry Sabato said after Capito's announcement, "The Republicans do not have another good option in West Virginia." [Roll Call, 10/3/05; Charleston Gazette, 10/4/05]

- Capito Was Just the First of Many to Say They Wouldn't Challenge Byrd. In October Secretary of State Betty Ireland announced that she would not challenge Senator Byrd in 2006. In November, former University of West Virginia basketball coach, Gale Catlett, declined to enter the race. Finally, just two days ago, West Virginia Republican Party Chairman, Robin Capehart, declined to challenge Senator Byrd. [Associated Press, 10/27/05; Associated Press, 11/11/05; Register-Herald, 12/6/05]

ND: Despite Personal Visit from Rove, Hoeven Said NO to Conrad Challenge. Last week, Governor John Hoeven announced he will not challenge Kent Conrad in 2006, "depriving Republicans of someone they considered their strongest candidate against the Democratic incumbent." Just days earlier, Karl Rove visited North Dakota and met with Hoeven, and the Washington Times reported, "The White House has promised to give Mr. Hoeven its fullest support if he runs." [AP, 9/30/05; Washington Times, 9/29/05]

VT: Despite Urging from Dole and White House, Vermont Governor Said NO to Senate Bid. In April, Senator Jim Jeffords announced that he would not be running for re-election. Immediately, Governor Jim Douglas was widely labeled as the strongest potential Republican candidate for the Senate seat, with one local paper noting that Douglas "is expected to face intense pressure from Republicans in Washington to enter the Senate race." Douglas spoke to NRSC Chair Sen. Elizabeth Dole and to at least one White House official before announcing that he would not run for the Senate. [NPR, 4/20/05; AP, 4/20/05, 4/29/05; Burlington Free Press, 4/21/05]

MI: Despite Pleas From Bush, Michigan Rep. Miller Said NO to Senate Bid. Last December, President Bush publicly urged Congresswoman Candice Miller, telling her Chief of Staff, "You need to tell her she needs to run for the Senate," before calling the Congresswoman personally. Described as "the party's top choice," Miller announced in January that she would not run for Senate. As one Detroit columnist noted, "Top Republicans with safe jobs looked at this, and shook their heads. No, thank you." [Detroit News, 12/9/04; AP, 1/11/05; Detroit Metro Times, Lessenberry column, 8/24/05]

FL: Despite Repeated Attempts, At Least Four Recruited Candidates Have Said NO to Florida Senate Bid. Since last November, Florida Republicans have been urged unsuccessfully to enter the 2006 Senate race, including Governor Jeb Bush. Even after Katherine Harris announced her candidacy for the seat, the White House and NRSC continued to speak to Republicans about getting into the race, with a huge focus on Florida House Speaker Allan Bense and former Congressman Joe Scarborough, both of whom subsequently decided not to enter the Senate race. [Jupiter Courier, 11/24/04; Gainesville Sun, 8/4/05; Pensacola News Journal, 8/17/05, 8/21/05]

WA: Despite Visit from Dole, Rossi Said NO to Washington Senate Bid. Labeled "Republicans' brightest star," 2004 candidate for Governor Dino Rossi announced in July that he would not challenge Senator Maria Cantwell in 2006. The AP reported that Rossi's decision process froze the field in place until he told the salivating national party that he was declining their call to duty. Polls had showed Rossi as the strongest Republican candidate. Rossi's announcement came just one week after Sen. Elizabeth Dole was in Washington, personally urging Rossi to enter the race. [AP, 7/21/05; Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 7/26/05]

NE: Despite National Pleas, List of Prominent Republicans Saying NO to Nelson Challenge Keeps Growing. Republicans have failed to recruit a top-tier challenger for Senator Ben Nelson in Nebraska. When pressed to change his decision to run for reelection and instead challenge Nelson, Governor Dave Heineman said "that on a scale of zero to 100 his interest in the Senate race is 'minus-1000 and dropping.'" Heineman joined former Governor and Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns, Rep. Tom Osborne, and NE Attorney General Jon Bruning as prominent Nebraska Republicans who have declined to challenge Nelson. Most recently, when the White House asked former Senator Dave Karnes to run for his old job, he too said no. [Roll Call, 5/10/05; Roll Call, 3/9/05; Omaha World-Herald, 8/2/05]

NY: Giuliani and Pataki Both Refused to Challenge Clinton. In New York, Republicans failed to draw a top-tier challenger to Sen. Hillary Clinton when Governor George Pataki and former New York City Mayor Rudi Giuliani both declined to run for the Senate. [AP, 4/18/05; Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, 8/3/05]

WI: Despite Calls from State GOP Chair, Potential Wisconsin Candidate Said NO to Kohl Challenge. This week, it was reported that Waukesha County Executive Dan Finley will not run for Senate in Wisconsin against Sen. Herb Kohl. Apparently, the State Republican Party had already started polling, in conjunction with Finley, for an upcoming Senate bid, but, instead, Finley chose to take a job at the Milwaukee Public Museum. Finley's announcement reportedly "blindsided Republican heavyweights." [Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Spivak & Bice column, 10/4/05]

EVEN REPUBLICANS ADMIT NRSC RECRUITING IS WEAK. "Nationally, overall, their recruiting has not been as strong as it was in 2002 and 2004…they have missed a lot of chances in recruitment," Republican pollster David Johnson said of the NRSC. [The Hill, 10/4/05]

Dec 8, 2005
By: Phil Singer, DSCC
See the full article

In an ominous election-year sign for Republicans, Americans are leaning sharply toward wanting Democrats to take control of Congress, an AP-Ipsos poll finds. Democrats are favored 49 percent to 36 percent.

The poll was taken this week as Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff pleaded guilty to tax evasion, fraud and corruption charges and agreed to aid a federal investigation of members of Congress and other government officials.

President Bush's job approval remains low - 40 percent in the AP-Ipsos poll. About as many approve of his handling of Iraq, where violence against Iraqis and U.S. troops has been surging.

"I don't think anyone is hitting the panic button," said Rich Bond, a former Republican National Committee chairman. "But there is an acute recognition of the grim environment that both parties are operating in."

"If the Democrats had any leadership or any message, they could be poised for a good year," Bond said. "But in the absence of that, they have not been able to capitalize on Republican woes. Because of the size of the GOP majority, Democrats have to run the board, and I don't see that happening."

The public's unease with Republican leadership in the White House and Congress creates a favorable environment for Democrats, said Democratic consultant Dane Strother.

"The problem is you don't vote for a party," Strother said. "You're voting for a member of Congress. And we're a year away."

About a third of the public, 34 percent, approves of the job Congress is doing, and nearly twice as many, 63 percent, disapprove, according to the poll of 1,001 adults taken Jan. 3-5. The margin of sampling error was plus or minus 3 percentage points. Public opinion of both Democrats and Republicans in Congress has been mixed, recent polling found.

"Neither one of the parties has done a very good job so far," said Cristal Mills, a political independent from Los Angeles. "They get away with murder, they get paid to pass certain things. It's the good ol' boy syndrome."

In the Senate, 33 seats will be on the ballot in November, 17 of them currently in Democratic hands, 15 controlled by Republicans, and one held by Sen. James Jeffords, a Vermont independent. Democrats now have 44 Senate seats, and need to pick up seven to gain a majority, six if Vermont independent Bernie Sanders replaces Jeffords.

All 435 House seats are on the ballot this fall, and Democrats need to gain at least 15 to become the majority party and take control of the House.

While many House races are noncompetitive, Republican strategists fear that fallout from the Abramoff scandal will give Democrats fresh opportunity for gains. But they dismiss suggestions that Democrats could take control of the House.

Republicans became the dominant party in the House in 1994, when the GOP picked up more than 50 seats held by Democrats. In that midterm election, Democrats won four open seats that previously were held by the GOP.

Carl Forti, a spokesman for the GOP's congressional campaign committee, said about 30 House seats are competitive this year, compared with more than 100 a dozen years ago. Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, who heads the Democrats' campaign efforts, put the competitive number in 2006 at 42, and he suggested ongoing scandals improve Democratic recruitment of candidates by "making the environment more conducive. It helps move them along in the process."

Some people say they are leaning toward giving Democrats control of Congress because they want to see changes.

"I just don't like the direction our country is going in," said Steve Brown, a political independent from Olympia, Wash. "I think a balance of power would be beneficial right now."

WILL LESTER
Associated Press
See the full article

The organization sponsoring an amendment to ban same-sex marriage remains well short of the 611,009 signatures needed to put measures to a vote in a statewide referendum.

Supporters of the amendment to prohibit same-sex marriages remain short of the required signatures, said John Stemberger, the chairman of Florida4marriage.org, which is sponsoring the measure. Dubbed the " Florida Marriage Protection Amendment," the proposal would also ban civil unions that offer identical rights and benefits as marriage.

Supporters say the amendment is necessary in case a court strikes down an existing state law that already bars gay marriage. But opponents warn that it could cut off other rights for gay couples, such as health-care benefits.

Stemberger estimated his group has collected between 200,000 and 250,000 signatures so far. But he also said the total is growing by tens of thousands of signatures each day.

Backers have also ramped up their efforts, he said, making frequent appearances on local talk-radio shows and sending word to churches that they have only three Sundays remaining to gather petitions.

"It's a tough goal," Stemberger said. "But it's a goal that we think we're going to be able to make."

Collecting the necessary signatures does not guarantee any amendment will appear on the ballot.

Each must still survive scrutiny from the state Supreme Court, which evaluates proposed amendments to ensure that they are limited to a single subject and that the ballot summaries are clear and accurate. Those hearings begin next month.

-From the Sun Sentinel, January 6, 2006
See the full article

For the third quarter in a row, state Sen. Ron Klein raised more money than incumbent Rep. Clay Shaw in a congressional race that is shaping up to be among the most expensive in the nation.

For all of 2005, Klein, D-Boca Raton, raised about $1.32 million to Shaw's $1.15 million. But Shaw, R-Fort Lauderdale, continued to have more money in the bank for future spending.

At year's end, Shaw had nearly $1.5 million to Klein's $1.1 million, according to their campaigns.

Final figures are scheduled to be filed with the Federal Election Commission by Jan. 31, but both campaigns released preliminary figures Wednesday.

For the three months ending Dec. 31, Klein raised $365,000, according to campaign manager Brian Smoot. For the same period, Shaw raised $322,000, according to press secretary Gail Gitcho.

"Congressman Shaw will continue an aggressive fund-raising schedule. He is pleased to have nearly a million and a half in the bank with 10 months out from election day," Gitcho said.

Smoot said Klein's fund-raising lead was a reflection of "the level of support we a receiving in the state," and the "work and effort Sen. Klein has put in and will continue to put in for this campaign."

Klein was forced to postpone several fund-raisers as a result of the hurricanes that devastated South Florida but made up for them later in the quarter, Smoot said.

Gitcho said she was unaware of any fund-raisers that Shaw was forced to cancel because of the storms.

By Larry Lipman
Palm Beach Post Washington Bureau
Friday, January 06, 2006
See the full article

Rasmussen. 1/3/06. Likely voters. MoE 4.5%. (11/14 results)

Senate
Nelson (D) 54
Harris (R) 31

Governor
Gallagher (R) 37 (40)
Davis (D) 37 (40)

Crist (R) 36 (38)
Davis (D) 35 (41)

Gallagher (R) 36
Smith (D) 35

Crist (R) 40
Smith (D) 35
See the full article

By BILL KACZOR of Associated Press
Posted January 5 2006, 4:33 PM EST

TALLAHASSEE -- The Florida Supreme Court threw out the state's voucher system that allows some children to attend private schools at taxpayer expense, saying Thursday that it violates the state constitution's requirement of a uniform system of free public schools.

The 5-2 opinion struck down the Opportunity Scholarship Program, championed by Gov. Jeb Bush, effective at the end of the current school year. It was the nation's first statewide system of school vouchers.

About 700 children across Florida are using the program to attend a private or parochial school after transferring from public schools the state deems failing. It is part of a broader accountability program Bush instigated as one of his top priorities, including testing at virtually every level and a school grading system that offers performance-based rewards and punishments.

``I think it is a sad day for accountability in our state,'' Bush said. But he added the voucher program served a purpose because it ``put pressure on school districts to focus on the underperforming schools.''

Only three Broward County schools qualified for Opportunity Scholarships this year: Arthur Ashe Middle in Fort Lauderdale, which received Fs in 2004 and 2005, and Lauderdale Manors in Fort Lauderdale, which received Fs in 2003 and 2005, and North Lauderdale Academy Charter, which got Fs in 2003 and 2004. Three other elementary schools -- Sunland Park in Fort Lauderdale, Park Ridge in Pompano Beach and Markham in Pompano Beach -- would have qualified if they received an F grade this year.

In Palm Beach County, 91 students attend private schools on Opportunity Scholarships, down from more than 110 in recent years. Seven county schools had been eligible to participate in the program, including two that were added before the start of the school year: Delray-Boynton Academy and Riviera Beach Academy. Those two schools, which were recently converted from charter schools to alternative schools under the school district's control, received Fs in 2004 and 2005. Another five other schools (three charter, two alternative) with F grades in recent years would have been eligible this year - if they were unable to avoid a second F.

The ruling did not directly affect nearly 30,000 students in two other Florida voucher programs for disabled and poor children, but opponents said it should serve as a precedent to challenge them and similar programs in other states.

Bush said he will look for ways to continue the voucher programs, including private funding, changing state law and amending the Florida Constitution.

``I don't think any option should be taken off the table,'' the governor said. ``School choice is as American as apple pie in my opinion. ... The world is made richer and fuller and more vibrant when you have choices.''

Chief Justice Barbara Pariente, writing for the majority, said the program ``diverts public dollars into separate private systems parallel to and in competition with the free public schools,'' which are the sole means set out in the state constitution for educating Florida children.

Private schools also are not uniform when compared with each other or the public system and they are exempt from many standards imposed by law on public schools, such as mandatory testing, she added.

The ruling was a victory for public schools across the state and nation, said Ron Meyer, lead attorney for a coalition, including a statewide teachers union, that challenged the voucher program.

``It means that Florida's taxpayers will not be forced to pay for schools which are unaccountable,'' Meyer said. The public schools of Florida will welcome the return of these voucher students at the end of the school year.''

Justices Kenneth Bell and Raoul Cantero, both appointed by Bush, dissented. Justice Peggy Quince, who joined the majority, was jointly appointed by the late Gov. Lawton Chiles and Bush, then the Republican governor-elect, in 1998. The other justices were appointed by Chiles, a Democrat.

Bell contended there was no evidence the voucher program violates the constitutional provision's purpose to ``ensure that every child in Florida has an opportunity to receive a high-quality education by requiring the Legislature to make adequate provision for a uniform system of free public schools.''

Bush declined to discuss any specific plans to continue the vouchers, noting the high court has agreed to let the program remain in effect until the next school year.

``We will calmly go about making the determination of what the strategy will be,'' Bush said. ``We don't have a strategy yet.''

Clark Neily, senior attorney for the Institute for Justice, who argued the case for voucher advocates, said they hope other programs for getting children into private schools could be expanded to pick up students who lose their opportunity scholarships.

Those programs include tax credits for corporations that give scholarships to poor children and a separate voucher program that lets disabled students to attend private schools at public expense. About 13,500 students get corporate scholarships and 16,300 disabled children receive McKay vouchers.

The 1999 law previously had been ruled unconstitutional by the 1st District Court of Appeal on grounds that it violated the separation of church and state in the Florida Constitution as most of the voucher children are in parochial schools.

The high court found no need to address that issue after finding vouchers violate the public education provision. The U.S. Constitution does not address public education, so that effectively barred any appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court on freedom of religion grounds, Bush and Meyer agreed.

The law was challenged a day after Bush signed it.

More than a dozen groups filed ``friends-of-the-court'' briefs in the case, ranging from the U.S. Department of Justice, supporting the state, to the International Reading Association, supporting the voucher opponents.

Those opponents include the Florida Education Association, the state teachers union; the Florida PTA; the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People; and the League of Women Voters.

Meyer said his clients have not yet decided whether to challenge the other voucher programs but that ``the same legal principles are present.''

The opinion also should set a national precedent because most other states have similar constitutional provisions providing for uniform school systems, Meyer said.
See the full article