Obama to seek spending freeze, more aid to middle class

His first State of the Union speech will outline plans to cut the federal deficit and provide tax credits and other relief to middle-class families, students and workers.

By Christi Parsons and Peter Nicholas

January 26, 2010

Reporting from Washington

Moving to address rising voter anger over federal deficits and the tattered shape of their own pocketbooks, President Obama will propose a freeze on non-defense-related federal spending as well as expanded aid to middle-class families in his State of the Union speech Wednesday night, White House aides said Monday.

To counter the soaring federal deficit, which polls show is a major factor in voters' discontent, Obama will announce that the budget blueprint he files next week will contain a "hard freeze" on discretionary spending that lasts through 2013, an effort his advisors liken to the fiscal discipline average families impose on themselves every day.

Obama and Vice President Joe Biden unveiled the outlines of their relief package for the middle class at a White House meeting Monday.

Under the proposals, the child-care tax credit would be nearly doubled for families earning less than $85,000, federal student loan repayments would be capped at a lower level, employers would be required to offer automatic payroll deductions for retirement accounts, and financing would be increased for families caring for elderly relatives.

"None of these steps alone will solve all the challenges facing the middle class," Obama said. "But hopefully some of these steps will reestablish some of the security that's slipped away in recent years. Because in the end, that's how Joe and I measure progress -- not by how the markets are doing, but by how the American people are doing. It's about whether they see some progress in their own lives."

The State of the Union, delivered to a joint session of Congress, will also address the stubbornly high unemployment rate, aides said, as well as key foreign policy goals and new proposals to improve transparency in government. The White House said the speech was still being written and it did not make details on those initiatives available Monday.

With his job approval ratings in decline and his political fortunes worsening in recent days, Obama is fighting to keep his Democratic majorities in Congress through the fall elections. That means persuading disillusioned voters to reinvest in him and his party for another two years.

"That sense of angst is what drove him to seek office," said White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer. "It is something we have focused on in his year in the White House . . . and a big part of what we will do in 2010 and the rest of the presidency."

House Republican Leader John A. Boehner of Ohio lit into the president's economic plans.

"After spending most of the last year focused on their costly government takeover of healthcare, the White House and congressional Democrats again claim they are pivoting to the issue of jobs -- even as they remain committed to their job-killing agenda," Boehner said in a statement. "Americans are asking, 'Where are the jobs?' "

On Monday, Obama said the loss of 7 million jobs since the recession began is "an epidemic that demands our relentless and sustained response," but he did not say what he might propose in the State of the Union speech, which will air Wednesday at 6 p.m. Pacific time.

White House officials said the tax-credit plans and other measures rolled out Monday are directly linked to job creation.

Under Obama's 2011 budget proposal, any discretionary spending unrelated to national security would be frozen at its current level, two senior administration officials said Monday night. The freeze would affect roughly a sixth of the federal budget.

The president will propose to keep the freeze in place through 2013 so that, by the middle of the decade, that component of the budget will reach its lowest percentage of gross domestic product in 50 years. The savings from the three-year freeze is expected to amount to $250 billion over the next decade, compared with the baseline set in 2008.

"Some agencies will be up, some agencies will be down," said one of the senior administration officials. "While there's an overall freeze, it doesn't mean that every agency and every agency's budget will be frozen."

The second official said the message should make perfect sense across the country.

"The president made these decisions like a family would do sitting around the dinner table," the official said. "You can't afford to do everything you might want to do."

With those dinner-table decisions in mind, the president plans to offer relief to college students who graduate with substantial student loans.

He plans to limit a graduate's federal loan payments to 10% of his or her income, above a basic living allowance. Currently the yearly payments are capped at 15% of discretionary income.

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said, "If you're trying to figure out how you're going to go back to school so you can get that next job, we don't want you to be crushed by the burden of skyrocketing tuition payments."

Like many other features of the president's plan unveiled Monday, the proposal is a result of the Middle Class Task Force that was created as one of Obama's first official acts last January. In many cases, the programs unveiled this week are already in place, but Obama plans to expand them.

Another example is the child- and dependent-care tax credit, which would nearly double for families earning less than $85,000 a year. The president plans to increase the tax credit rate to 35% of child-care expenses from the current 20%.

Administration officials hastened to add that their expanding definition of the "middle class" doesn't go far enough to include all those in need.

"I consider that to be a fairly narrow view of the middle class," said Jared Bernstein, economic policy advisor to Biden, who heads the task force.

Other initiatives are meant to help a larger pool of American workers, including creating a system of automatic workplace IRAs. Obama will propose expanding tax credits to match retirement savings, as well as enacting new safeguards to protect retirement savings.

He also plans to expand support for families balancing work with elder care, although aides did not say exactly how he intends to do it.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-obama-middle-class26-2010jan26,0,4604816,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

EDITORIAL

Obama the populist

The president is making noises about helping the middle class. Is it a real economic plan, or pandering?

January 26, 2010

President Obama seems so rattled by Republican Scott Brown's victory in the Massachusetts Senate race that he's scrambling to reestablish his bona fides with The Little People. Last week he picked another fight with big banks, calling for new limits on their size and business ventures. In his weekend radio address, he bashed the Supreme Court for handing "a huge victory to the special interests and their lobbyists" by eliminating some limits on corporate and union electioneering. And on Monday, he outlined a proposal to provide larger tax cuts and subsidies for middle-class families.

Although some of these proposals address real problems, the populist tone struck by Obama and his aides made their efforts seem like pandering. That's particularly true of Monday's announcement, which was billed as a preview of initiatives from the White House's Middle Class Task Force. Obama noted that "creating good, sustainable jobs is the single most important thing we can do to rebuild the middle class" -- a sentiment shared across the political spectrum, even if Democrats and Republicans disagree sharply over how to achieve that goal. But, he added, "we also need to reverse the overall erosion in middle-class security."

The administration's plan for shoring up the middle class' fortunes includes a much more generous tax credit for moderate-income families who pay for day care so the parents can work or attend classes, as well as more child-care subsidies for low-income workers. It offers more help for people caring for elderly relatives, and easier repayment terms for federal student loans. And it provides a larger tax credit for retirement savings, coupled with a proposal (recycled from last year) to give workers the option of having part of their paychecks deposited into a tax-sheltered retirement account.

Middle-class Americans have certainly felt squeezed over the last decade, as median U.S. incomes failed to keep pace with inflation. And some of the administration's moves could conceivably yield more benefits in the long run than they would cost. Yet Obama seems to be responding to the wrong problems. The public is anxious about jobs, the economy and the massive federal deficit. If the administration is going to seek new tax breaks or subsidies, the point should be to put people to work and spur economic growth, not just make life easier for a particularly valuable segment of the electorate.

The White House declined to discuss how much the new benefits for the middle class would cost or how they would be paid for, saying only that those issues would be addressed when Obama releases his proposal for the fiscal 2011 budget on Feb. 1. There have been reports that the administration plans to call for a freeze on some domestic spending, in which case the tax cuts and subsidies outlined Monday would represent trade-offs more than simple handouts. But the bigger problem is that the administration appears to be flailing, reacting to the shifting political winds instead of pursuing a clearly defined economic strategy. That's no way to inspire the confidence among consumers and businesses that's crucial to a robust recovery.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-obama26-2010jan26,0,5482190,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

California launches plan to cut prison population

As cost-saving measures, the number of parole violators returned behind bars will be cut and low-risk offenders will not be regularly supervised by a parole agent

By Patrick McGreevy

January 26, 2010

Reporting from Sacramento

State prison authorities Monday began reducing the number of parole violators sent back behind bars and offering inmates more opportunity to shorten their sentences, as part of a plan to decrease the prison population by 6,500 inmates over the next year.

Low-risk offenders, including those convicted of nonviolent crimes, will not have regular supervision by a parole agent. And they will no longer be returned to prison for technical violations such as alcohol use, missed drug tests or failure to notify the state of an address change.

Parole agents will reduce the number of inmates they supervise to focus on those the state deems to be at highest risk of committing more crimes, such as people who have committed sexual crimes and other violent offenses. Each agent's caseload will fall from 70 parolees to 48.

In addition, prisoners can shave time off their sentences by working on firefighting crews or by obtaining a high school diploma or trade-school certificate or by completing drug or alcohol rehabilitation programs.

Over time, prisons chief Matthew Cate said, the rules will lower the rate at which parolees are returned to state lockups, reduce crime overall and "save, over the course of a full year, a half a billion dollars for California taxpayers."

The state will thus address its prison overcrowding problem while "significantly increasing public safety," said Cate, who heads the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

Some law-enforcement officials, state legislators and crime-victim advocates took a different view, predicting a spike in crime in California as more people leave prison earlier with less supervision.

LAPD Lt. Brian Johnson, a director of the Los Angeles Police Protective League, said the state "will start to release numerous dangerous felons into our community."

Cate said that in a state prison system with 168,000 inmates, only 15% to 18% of inmates will be eligible for unsupervised parole, and that the effect of the changes will be gradual.

"No one gets out today," he said.

The revisions were approved by the Legislature and signed into law last year by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who defended the changes Monday.

"It is not going to compromise public safety," Schwarzenegger said in a Sacramento speech. "Every time you have inmates go out, they come right back in again -- 70% of them. That costs our state . . . a tremendous amount of money."

The changes are occurring as the state has slashed budgets for education and rehabilitation programs in prisons.

"These people are not rehabilitated, and yet we're going to open the door and let them out?" said Harriet Salerno, president of the group Crime Victims, speaking at a Capitol news conference that was also attended by representatives of Los Angeles police officers and Los Angeles County sheriffs' deputies.

Sheriff Lee Baca said he is "very concerned" about the changes. He has ordered his deputies to meet with low-level offenders released from prison and tell them about community services such as mental health and drug rehabilitation programs, said Sheriff's Lt. Wayne Bilowit.

Assemblyman Ted Lieu (D-Torrance), a former prosecutor running for state attorney general, introduced a bill Monday that would give local law enforcement officials a greater role in blocking the release of inmates they deem to be a risk to the public.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-prisons26-2010jan26,0,3375874,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In anti-tax Oregon, voters consider tapping the rich

Two measures will test how willing residents are to increase taxes on those theoretically best equipped to pay them -- the wealthy and big companies.

By Kim Murphy

January 26, 2010

Reporting from Portland, Ore.

Oregon officials know all about anti-tax fervor.

Over the years, voters here have capped property taxes (saddling the state with two-thirds the cost of running the schools) and passed a constitutional amendment requiring rebates whenever tax receipts come in 2% over budget. Nine times they have been asked to OK a sales tax -- and said no. Proposals to increase the state income tax? Down in flames twice.

But now the Legislature is taking a tack that analysts think could finally pull the rug out from under the tax revolt: soaking the rich.

In mail-in voting that ends today, Oregon is considering measures to raise taxes on households earning $250,000 or more and on individuals earning at least $125,000, as well as hike corporate taxes. About 39,000 of the state's 1.5 million taxpayers would be subject to the higher tax, and some big companies could see their annual bills go from $10 to $100,000.

The success or failure of Measures 66 and 67 will be a concrete test -- one of the few in the country this year -- of how willing voters are to accept tax increases targeted at those theoretically best equipped to pay them.

"These measures are the first test of a progressive solution to the recession," said Cynthia Kain, a spokeswoman for the National Education Assn. who has been working to help pass the ballot measures.

Opponents of the tax hikes warn that they could cripple small businesses and jeopardize employment in a state that has lost 131,000 private-sector jobs during the recession.

But many voters appear willing to risk that. Polls have shown both measures ahead, although one late last week showed the gap tightening.

"I'm convinced. Let's tax the hell out of 'em," said Rebecca Maxwell, a young software developer from Portland.

Kevin Looper, who is running the campaign to ratify the ballot measures, said that "when we started doing focus groups, it was amazing to hear voters demanding to know where the banks were on these measures. Because they wanted to be on the opposite side."

The banking industry has contributed heavily to the Oregonians Against Job-Killing Taxes campaign. Billionaire Philip Knight, chairman of Beaverton-based Nike Inc., and Timothy Boyle, chief executive of Columbia Sportswear Co. in Portland, also have kicked in large donations, as have business industry groups, big timber companies, farming groups and lawyers.

The campaign in support of the tax increases has been financed mostly with contributions from small businesses and public employee unions -- including $1.65 million from the Oregon Education Assn. and more than $1 million from other local and national public employee labor unions. (They were inspired, no doubt, by the opposition's assertion that the budget woes could be lessened if state employees demanded fewer pay increases and started paying a share of their healthcare.)

Gail Rasmussen, a classroom support worker from Eagle Point and president of the Oregon Education Assn., said teachers had been canvassing their neighborhoods to drum up support for the measures because of the crippling cuts Oregon schools had made -- and the threat of more to come.

"We know of at least two districts in southern Oregon that went to a four-day work week. We're hearing about districts that no longer have track programs, or field trips, or speech and debate.

"And I can tell you that there is absolutely no cushion in anybody's budget, if these measures fail, to accommodate the kinds of draconian cuts that will be required across the board," Rasmussen said.

If Measure 66 passes, Oregon would tie with Hawaii for the highest personal income tax rate in the nation. And Measure 67 would give Oregon the highest capital gains tax and highest corporate minimum tax.

Yet that is not unreasonable, supporters say, in a state that relies almost exclusively on income taxes. Oregonian businesses pay no sales tax and only limited property taxes.

"Before this measure, we had the third-lowest corporate taxes in the country, and after this we'll have the fifth-lowest," said state House Speaker Dave Hunt, a Democrat.

Oregon's minimum corporate tax is $10, an amount that hasn't changed since 1931. Because of generous write-offs, many Fortune 500 companies pay only that amount.

Measure 67 would raise the minimum corporate tax to $150. More important, it would institute a 0.1% tax on sales receipts of corporations whose in-state revenue exceeded $500,000, with a maximum tax of $100,000.

Sole proprietorships and small companies would see little or no effect, although their owners' personal taxes might go up if their individual annual incomes rose above $125,000.

"The short story is that 97.5% of businesses will pay just $150, or will pay no more than they do today," said Scott Moore, communications director for the Vote Yes campaign.

Still, some critics say a tax increase could push struggling companies over the edge.

"I have a small business" with 20 employees, said Brent DeHart, who owns a gas station and aviation fueling company in Salem. "And with the new minimum, my taxes are going to go to $4,000. Let me tell you, my company doesn't have $4,000. We're literally going into debt right now to continue operations."

For households, the tax rate would increase 1.8 percentage points on taxable income from $250,000 to $500,000, and 2 percentage points above $500,000. For individuals, those increases would kick in at $125,000 and $250,000.

The state's largest newspaper, the Oregonian, is opposing both measures.

"Measure 66 is not about fairness," the paper said in an editorial . "It is about raising $472 million in taxes during one of the worst recessions in Oregon history to cover a gaping hole in the state budget."

Pat McCormick, spokesman for the anti-tax campaign, said Oregon's biggest business groups voluntarily forfeited their 2% "kicker" rebate in 2007 to create a $300-million rainy day fund for the state. Last year, they proposed a "shared responsibility plan" to help get around the budget shortfalls. That plan advocated a temporary income tax increase for all wage-earners and an increase in the $10 corporate minimum tax to $300.

"Typically in these kind of budget circumstances, in recessions, there's been a point where players are in a dark room and everybody coughs up a little, deals are made and the participants go out and get the votes to make sure that the compromise is going to be effected. That never happened," McCormick said.

Democrats, with a 36-24 majority in the state House and an 18-12 edge in the Senate, pushed forward with little Republican support.

"They looked back at those two previous [failed] across-the-board measures and said it does not make sense in a recession to raise everybody's taxes," Hunt said. "It does make sense to ask those who are continuing to do well to do a little bit more to protect critical services for everybody."

A number of business owners support the tax increases, arguing that they are a reasonable price to pay to stave off cuts that would add pressure to schools, public safety, health and welfare.

"These taxes are minuscule," said Arthur Graham, who owns an artists' paint manufacturing company. Graham estimated he would wind up paying $150 in corporate tax and "considerably more" in personal income tax. But he is willing to do it, he said.

"Is it going to prevent me from going out and buying a new Porsche? No, it isn't," Graham said. "But what about the benefits it provides to all the people in Oregon?"

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-oregon-tax26-2010jan26,0,7820846,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

'Chemical Ali' hanged by Iraq government

Ali Hassan Majid, a cousin of Saddam Hussein, is executed after receiving four death sentences for his role in the killing of hundreds of thousands of Kurds and Shiites beginning in the late 1980s.

By Raheem Salman and Ned Parker

January 26, 2010

Reporting from Baghdad and New York

The Iraqi government on Monday hanged Ali Hassan Majid, one of the most notorious figures of Saddam Hussein's regime, who had earned the nickname "Chemical Ali" for his gassing of Kurds in the late 1980s.

Majid was executed after being sentenced to death in four cases brought before an Iraqi criminal court for the killing of Kurds and Shiites during the rule of Hussein, his first cousin.

The hanging was announced by government spokesman Ali Dabbagh on Iraqi television. Prime Minister Nouri Maliki said in a statement, "By executing Ali Majid, another black page in the book of repression, genocide and crimes against humanity has been closed."

Monday's execution was carried out after a final guilty verdict was rendered against Majid last week for the 1988 gassing of Kurds in the northern town of Halabja, an attack that killed as many as 5,000 people and came to symbolize Hussein's brutal methods.

Later, state television broadcast two pictures of Majid, according to Agence France-Presse. One showed him in an orange-red jumpsuit with his face uncovered. In the second photo, Majid wore a black hood and was flanked by two masked men.

U.S. forces captured Majid in August 2003 and he was first sentenced to death in June 2007 for his role in the broad military campaign against the Kurds that was called Anfal, Arabic for the "spoils of war." The offensive lasted from 1987 to 1988 and saw up to 182,000 people killed, villages razed and families herded into internment camps.

Majid received another death sentence for his involvement in the suppression of an uprising among Iraq's Shiite majority after the 1991 Persian Gulf War. The revolt ended with thousands killed and many buried in mass graves.

The Iraqi judiciary also sentenced him to death for his role in quelling a Shiite revolt after Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Sadeq Sadr was killed in 1999 and his supporters rioted.

In court, Majid had presented an image in stark contrast to his reputation as Hussein's bloodthirsty crony: a thin figure with gray hair who propped himself up with a cane.

The fates of two of Majid's codefendants in the Anfal case remain undecided. Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, a Kurd, and senior Sunni politicians oppose the death sentence handed to Sultan Hashim Ahmad Jabburi Tai, a former defense minister and commander in the north during the Anfal campaign.

Hashim surrendered to American forces in 2003 and may have collaborated in some form with the U.S. military and Iraqi opposition before the U.S.-led invasion in 2003. His supporters argue that he was following orders during the Anfal campaign, while many of the country's Shiite elite believe he should be executed.

Hussein Rashid Mohammed, the former deputy head of army operations, has also been sentenced to death.

Kurdish politicians applauded the death sentence against Majid.

"I hope everyone who is a criminal and commits these big crimes will be punished," said parliament member Mahmoud Othman, a Kurd.

But Othman lamented one sore point that hung over the Anfal and Halabja trials: Saddam Hussein, hanged in December 2006, was never brought to court for his actions against the Kurds.

"I think the wrong thing in all this process was that Saddam Hussein was quickly executed," Othman said. "Everything was ordered by him. He should have been left alive to see the trials and to talk about the secrets and who helped him from outside."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-fg-iraq-chemical26-2010jan26,0,374926,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

State Supreme Court OKs 'John Doe' warrants based on crime-scene DNA

The California Supreme Court ruled 5-2 today that prosecutors may get around legal deadlines by filing arrest warrants based on DNA left behind at a crime.

The ruling, written by Justice Ming W. Chin, also upheld the conviction of Paul Eugene Robertson for sexual offenses even though prosecutors obtained a DNA "match" after Robertson's DNA had been illegally placed in the state's DNA offender database.

Sacramento prosecutors filed an arrest warrant for "John Doe, unknown male," on Aug. 21, 2000, four days before the legal deadline or statute of limitations for filing charges in the case. Prosecutors attached a DNA profile to the warrant from evidence left at the crime.

Although Robertson's DNA had been "mistakenly" entered into the database, the errors that led to the collection of his blood did not require the court to throw out the evidence, Chin wrote.

The court majority said the use of DNA profiles to identify unknown suspects in arrest warrants was valid.

"We conclude that, when there is no more particular, accurate or reliable means of identification available to law enforcement, an arrest warrant or a complaint that describes the person to be arrested by a fictitious name and his unique DNA profile … satisfies the particularity requirements " of law, Chin wrote.

Justice Carlos Moreno, joined by Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar, dissented on the use of a "John Doe" warrant, calling it "a clever artifice intended solely to satisfy the statute of limitations until the identity of the perpetrator could be discovered."

"The arrest warrant that was issued a few days before the statute of limitations expired was not a true arrest warrant; it was a mere placeholder, because it did not authorize the arrest of any individual," Moreno wrote. "It was not until the warrant was amended to replace the name John Doe and the reference to the DNA profile with defendant's name that the warrant became effective and the prosecution commenced; but this was too late, because the statute of limitations had already expired."

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Lily Burk autopsy shows evidence of a violent struggle, coroner's official says

A 17-year-old girl killed last July, allegedly by a transient parolee, had bite marks to her face and ear and had injuries all over her body showing she violently struggled with her attacker, a coroner's official testified this morning.

Jeffrey Gutstadt, a medical examiner for L.A. County, testified Monday at the preliminary hearing of 50-year-old Charles Samuel, who is accused of kidnapping and murdering Lily Burk. Burk left her Los Feliz home on July 24 on an errand for her mother and never returned. Prosecutors allege Samuel killed the girl after failed attempts to get her to withdraw cash with a credit card.

[ Updated at 3 p.m.: Samuel was ordered to stand trial this afternoon for the murder of Burk and other felony counts, including kidnapping, robbery and carjacking.

Judge David S. Wesley found there was “sufficient cause” to believe Samuel is guilty of the crimes, and ordered him to return to court in February for arraignment. The judge denied a motion by Samuel's attorney to dismiss the case.]

Gutstadt said most of the injuries occurred while Burk was still alive. She was killed by an incision to the right side of her neck, possibly caused by a broken bottle, which would have caused her to lose consciousness within minutes, the examiner testified.

A forensic print specialist for the Los Angeles Police Department testified later in the morning that broken shards of green-colored glass, possibly from a Pellegrino water bottle, were found in the black Volvo where Burk's body was found. No fingerprints were found on the glass, she testified during cross examination by Samuel's attorney, Albert DeBlanc Jr.

Gutstadt also testified that more of the wounds were on the left side of the girl's body. On Friday, prosecutors presented video surveillance images and suggested Samuel drove Burk's black Volvo. Burk's body was later found on the passenger side of the vehicle.

The examiner also testified that Burk had sustained abrasions and contusions to her scalp, possibly indicating that her head had been hit against the car's dashboard or struck from above with an object.

Burk's mother, Deborah Drooz, clutched onto a handkerchief and quietly sobbed, her body shaking, as the coroner's official testified. The girl's father left the courtroom before the testimony began.

Judge David Wesley is expected to rule today on whether there is enough evidence to try Samuel, who had walked out from a residential drug-treatment facility on the day of the killing, in Burk's murder. Samuel is also accused of committing the murder in the course of a kidnapping, robbery and carjacking, making him eligible for the death penalty.

The hearing is expected to resume this afternoon.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/01/autopsy-on-17-year-old-murder-victim-showed-evidence-of-violent-struggle-coroner-official-says.html#more

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

OPINION

It's time for Obama to look at terrorism differently

The Democrats came into power believing that downplaying and downgrading the war on terrorism was both right and politically smart. The former is debatable, the latter unsupportable.

by Jonah Goldberg

January 26, 2010

It is always dangerous to mistake your ideological preferences for shrewd political strategy, but that is precisely what President Obama and his advisors have done with the war on terror.

On the right, the prevailing critique of the president's approach to the war on terror is that it is both deeply ideological and unserious. Obama remains fixated on the idea of closing Guantanamo, even if it means keeping irredeemable terrorists in U.S. prisons indefinitely. The administration initially banned the use of the term "war on terror," preferring the ridiculous bureaucratese "overseas contingency operations." Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano favors "man-caused disasters" to describe 9/11-style terrorism. Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr. has decided to send self-professed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and four others to a civilian trial in New York City, allegedly without consulting anyone save his wife and brother.

Immediately after the Ft. Hood shootings and again after the foiled Christmas Day attack by suspect Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the president's initial response was to look at the incidents through the now familiar ideological prism. These were "isolated" attacks from individual "extremists."

Admirably, Obama was quick to correct the record about Abdulmutallab, contradicting Napolitano's initial contention that "the system worked." Rather, Obama admitted there was "systemic failure." Since then, the media have reported that Abdulmutallab's arrest and interrogation were as flawed as the system that let him on the plane. FBI agents interviewed the jihadist for 50 minutes, according to the Associated Press, before he was read his Miranda rights and lawyered up, and no one even bothered to consult with Obama's national security team.

Meanwhile, pro-Obama pundits have been rolling out a revealing argument: Terrorism happens; get over it. For instance, Time's Peter Beinart and Newsweek's Fareed Zakaria argue that the American response to the Christmas Day bomber was "hysterical" or "panicked." Both say that the threat from Al Qaeda is overblown and distracts us from smart policies and more important priorities.

Whatever the merits of these arguments and Obama's responses, one thing is becoming clear: They amount to awful politics. One of Scott Brown's biggest applause lines in the Massachusetts special election last week to fill Ted Kennedy's Senate seat was that "in dealing with terrorists, our tax dollars should pay for weapons to stop them, not lawyers to defend them."

"People talk about the potency of the healthcare issue," Brown's political strategist, Eric Fehrnstrom, told National Review, "but from our own internal polling, the more potent issue here in Massachusetts was terrorism and the treatment of enemy combatants."

Indeed, after years of debate over the tactic, a Rasmussen poll found that 58% of Americans who responded favored waterboarding Abdulmutallab to get intelligence.

Of course, if the Obama administration's reluctance to treat terrorists like enemies is derived entirely from deep-seated ideological principle, then it should stick to its guns. But couldn't some of the reluctance be a holdover from the politics of the George W. Bush years? The Democrats came into power believing that downplaying and downgrading the war on terror was both right and politically smart. The former is debatable, the latter unsupportable.

Overseas, Obama doubled down in Afghanistan and has lobbed more Predator drones at Al Qaeda than Bush did. His base didn't like it, but it was nonetheless both right and politically shrewd.

The White House insists that it is not ideological but pragmatic, and yet it clings to an ideological nostrum that hawkishness on terrorism is not only atavistic but at odds with a progressive agenda at home.

The British empire destroyed Thuggee terrorism in India in the 1830s (the Thuggees may have killed between 50,000 to 2 million people). But the war on Thuggeeism hardly dominated British politics. Bill Clinton initiated "extraordinary rendition" without any serious political blowback or distraction (in part because it was largely kept secret). LBJ's Great Society and civil rights victories coincided with escalation in Vietnam. And let us not forget that domestic spending skyrocketed under Bush even as he prosecuted the war on terror.

Question: Would Obama's domestic prospects look better or worse right now if he'd correctly treated the Ft. Hood and Christmas Day attacks as terrorism from the outset?

Purely partisan conservatives should hope that Obama continues to see the war on terror through the same lens he's used for the last year. But it would be better for America -- and Obama -- if he saw the light.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-goldberg26-2010jan26,0,2150301,print.column

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the Daily News

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Release of inmates is decried

The state began reducing its prison population by 6,500 inmates Monday as part of a new cost-saving effort that also includes removing supervision for more than 7,700 parolees in Los Angeles County alone.

The state legislation that was passed last year amid the California budget crisis has alarmed law enforcement officials and victims-rights groups, who warned it would jeopardize public safety and reverse a years-long trend of declining crime rates.

Some law enforcement officials expressed particular concern about a provision that will reclassify 7,720 county parolees from supervised to nonsupervised status - allowing gang members to rejoin gangs and parolees to move wherever they want. Los Angeles County has about 34,000 parolees overall.

"It's very scary how we are being jeopardized," said Nina Salarno, executive director of Crime Victims United of California. "I don't want my child out and about anymore. There are some really bad people who are going to come out.

"I think you are going to see large increases in crime."

While the new law, SB 18XXX, reduces the number of parolees under supervision, state corrections officials said fears of increased crime are exaggerated and portrayed the law as an improvement to the system.

The law expands incentive credits for inmates to reduce their sentences and places parolees on nonrevocable parole status.

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation spokesman Gordon Hinkle said the new policies encourage inmates to complete rehabilitation programs, improve supervision for high-risk parolees and help the state "better partner with communities in managing minor parole violators."

The new policies are expected to reduce California's prison population by about 6,500 inmates over the next year, Hinkle said. That includes placing 1,000 gang members on Global Position System monitoring.

"I consider this reform to be a landmark achievement in improving public safety in California," CDCR Secretary Matthew Cate said.

"This fundamentally changes how we view successful parole supervision from a system that focused mainly on revocation to one that measures both public safety and how well parolees reintegrate into society."

Hinkle said the new law improves the current parole system by allowing parole agents to focus supervision on the more serious offenders, reducing parole agent caseloads and saving the state $100 million.

The law creates a system of "nonrevocable" parole for certain low-risk parolees, Hinkle said. These low-risk parolees will be subject to standard parole search-and-seizure conditions but will not be subject to traditional parole supervision upon their release from prison, Hinkle said.

But Paul Weber, president of the Los Angeles Police Protective League, said the CDCR is trying to "put the best possible spin" on the fact the state is releasing thousands of inmates.

"They are making this sound like a great day for California," Weber said. "The reality is it's not a great day for California. It's just another example where the government has failed to do one of its primary functions, which is public safety."

Although the CDCR claims these inmates are low-level offenders, state Sen. George Runner, R-Lancaster, said their nonviolent offenses range from possession of a firearm to domestic violence to human trafficking.

"Our studies show us that, historically, a nonviolent parolee is almost as likely to commit a violent crime as a violent parolee is," Runner said.

Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department spokesman Steve Whitmore said the department is very concerned about the plan to reclassify 7,720 county parolees from supervised to nonsupervised status. Given the fact that 70 percent of parolees, on average, violate conditions of their release and are sent back to prison, Whitmore said the new law is going to pose a significant challenge for law enforcement.

"What this means is you can't violate them for a parole infraction," Whitmore said. "They have to be arrested for a new crime. So, pretty much, this means no supervision at all."

During the Los Angeles City Council's Public Safety Committee hearing on Monday, Councilman Dennis Zine said the law is an example of the state's inability to handle its responsibilities.

"We have reduced crime because we put these people in to prison," Zine said. "I fault the governor, the courts and the state Legislature for putting these people back into the community. It is a disaster waiting to happen. It frustrates me that we work so hard to reduce crime and I predict now we are going to see a surge in crime."

Los Angeles Police Department's Gang and Narcotics Unit Capt. Justin Eisenberg said a comprehensive program is being developed to deal with the released prisoners - many of whom are expected to end up on Skid Row. Currently, 27 officers monitor 800 parolees on Skid Row.

"Adding the new parolees will put a strain on our resources," Eisenberg said. "We want to know who is coming out and we will be playing a very active role with our partners in identifying parolees and trying to keep track of them."

Hinkle said the law also establishes and expands drug and mental health re-entry courts for parolees to receive treatment rather than being returned to prison for violations.

Geri Silva, director of Families to Amend California's Three-Strikes based in South Los Angeles, said the organization of family members of incarcerated three-strikers applauds the new law.

"It makes obvious sense," Silva said. "The way it has been has been absolutely criminal. We are spending so much money sending low-level offenders to prison. We have people spending 25 years to life for petty theft when everything is going down the toilet - education, health care and services for the disabled.

"They should be in drug rehabilitation programs. It costs far less and you won't find them going back to prison in this revolving door."

http://www.dailynews.com/breakingnews/ci_14266922

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Panel looking to speed up DNA testing

OPTIONS: Some urging that city use outside firms to help with backlog.

With the Los Angeles Police Department facing a growing backlog in processing rape kits, a Los Angeles city panel Monday pushed for new ways to speed DNA testing, from hiring more outside firms to changing federal laws.

The City Council's Public Safety Committee recommended that the city spend $377,000 on private firms to help test DNA, in addition to existing plans to hire more criminalists. The funds were freed up because of bureaucratic delays in hiring the criminalists, a problem which frustrated some council members.

Also, City Council President Eric Garcetti urged the City Council's Public Safety Committee to exempt criminalists from the city furlough program, which requires them to stay home from work 10 percent of the time.

Garcetti expressed some frustration that the city has continued to face repeated problems with the DNA kit issue.

"It is a bit like `Groundhog Day,"' Garcetti said, referring to the Bill Murray movie in which a day's events are repeated over and over again. "When we make policy, we want to see it followed."

The City Council and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa had budgeted nearly $1million to hire 26 criminalists to clear the backlog, with the first 10 hires expected in the next few months. But those hirings were held up by an internal city committee overseeing hiring as the city grapples with a $200 million shortfall this year.

The Managed Hiring Committee last week cleared the hiring of the criminalists.

The delay saved the city $377,000, which the committee now wants to use to hire the outside firms.

Council members voiced frustration that their orders were being held up and that the cost of testing is increased by the requirement that LAPD verify all the results of private labs.

City officials said the private firms take four or five days to test the evidence and the city then has to spend two to four hours to verify the results.

"So we send it out and then it comes back and we have to do extra work to verify it," Councilman Dennis Zine said. "It means we are paying to have private companies do the work and we have to repeat it."

Council members plan to push for a change in federal law to eliminate the redundancy in testing procedures.

Pending federal legislation would allow work by certified private companies to be admitted in court directly without city confirmation. Garcetti said he and other city officials will lobby for the measure during a trip to Washington, D.C., in March.

Assistant Chief Michel Moore said the LAPD has a backlog of 1,254 rape kits and 1,700 new cases waiting to be tested.

"The department remains committed to our long-term hiring goal that will allow us to do all the testing for DNA of all sexual assault kits," Moore said. "And once we hire all the personnel, we believe we will be able to handle the 1,200 new kits we expect each year."

Once the department does that hiring and catches up with the backlog, Moore said the crime lab will be able to work on other cases involving property crimes where DNA was available.

City Controller Wendy Greuel, whose office has been conducting regular audits on the issue, supported the temporary hiring of outside firms.

"What we don't understand is how a City Council policy could not be implemented," Greuel said. "We understand they have a list of 90 people, and why should it take four months to hire 26 people?"

LAPD officials said they were continuing to do required background checks to approve the individuals who are hired.

Julie Butcher, general manager of the SEIU local representing the criminalists, said the money would be better used to keep those workers on duty without facing a furlough.

"Right now, you are losing 10 percent of productivity from these workers," Butcher said. "You could handle a lot of the work in-house without the extra cost of retesting evidence."

LAPD officials agreed, but said they were bound by city policy. They are looking to find federal grants to provide the money to cover the salaries of the workers.

http://www.dailynews.com/breakingnews/ci_14266286

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From Fox News

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Obama Gets 'F' on Stopping Spread of Weapons of Mass Destruction

In a 19-page report card being published Tuesday, the bipartisan Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction, Proliferation and Terrorism gives the Obama administration an "F" for failing to take key steps the commission outlined just over a year ago in its initial report.

A bipartisan, independent commission on stopping the spread of weapons of mass destruction says that the Obama administration has failed in its first year in office to do enough to prevent a germ weapons attack on America or to respond quickly and effectively should such an attack occur.

In a 19-page report card being published Tuesday, the Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction, Proliferation and Terrorism, chaired by former Senators Bob Graham, a Democrat from Florida, and Jim Talent, a Missouri Republican, gives the new administration the grade of "F" for failing to take key steps the commission outlined just over a year ago in its initial report.

Specifically, the commission concludes that the Obama administration, like the three administrations before it, has failed to pay consistent and urgent attention to increasing the nation's ability to respond quickly and effectively to a germ attack that would inflict massive casualties on the nation. 

The commission repeated its warning that unless nations acted decisively and urgently, it was more likely than not that a WMD will be used in a terrorist attack somewhere in the world by the end of 2013, and that the terrorists' weapon of choice would be biological, rather than nuclear.

The administration's delayed response to the H1N1 virus, the report concludes, demonstrated that the United States was "woefully behind in its ability to rapidly produce rapidly vaccines and therapeutics, essential steps for adequately responding to a biological threat, whether natural or man-made."

Even with time to prepare, the report noted, the epidemic peaked "before most Americans had access to vaccine."

And a bio-attack, it warned, would have no such warning.

The administration's lack of urgency was also reflected in its lack of priority on producing and distributing enough vaccines and other medical countermeasures for Americans, its reluctance to insist that hospitals have enough surge capacity to treat people who would be infected in a bioterror attack, and the lack of a national plan to coordinate federal, state and local efforts following a bioterror strike, the document asserts.

Ultimately, the commission chairman and vice chairman say, the "lack of preparedness" and "consistent lack of action"  reflect "a failure of the U.S. government to grasp the threat of biological weapons."

Unlike its effort to prevent a nuclear attack, the Obama administration has shown "no equal sense of urgency" about preventing or responding to germ warfare that might cause comparable death and suffering, the commission concludes.

The report assigns 17 grades that it says highlight the issues of greatest priority in protecting Americans from WMD. The commission gave the administration a "D+" for its efforts to tighten oversight of high-containment labs in which experiments involving the deadliest pathogens are conducted. There were still far too many Federal, state, and local agencies regulating germs in sometimes conflicting ways, it states.

The commission also gave Congress a failing grade for failing to consolidate the estimated 82 to 108 committees and subcommittees that oversee some part of the Department of Homeland Security. 

"Virtually no progress has been made since consolidation was first recommended by the 9/11 Commission in 2004," the report asserts.

The Graham/Talent WMD Commission, as it is known, is a legacy of the 9/11 Commission, which recommended its creation to examine WMD proliferation threats in its own report. In December, 2008, the WMD commission concluded in its final report that American national security faced ever growing threats from unconventional weapons, and from biological weapons in particular. 

Its report, "World at Risk," unanimously concluded that bioterrorism was the most likely WMD threat the nation confronted given the exponential growth of biological technology and the stated desire of Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups to acquire such weapons. It called upon the administration to take 13 steps to reduce America's vulnerability to such an attack. The new report card assesses the progress that the Obama administration has made in implementing its recommendations.

The report is not uniformly negative. It gives the Administration high marks -- an "A" --  for the reviews it has conducted into how best to store and secure dangerous pathogens, and two "A-minus" grades for appointing a WMD coordinator and restructuring how the White House oversees homeland security issues.

But it warns that such steps are not commensurate with the threat the nation faces from terrorist groups searching for unconventional weapons in asymmetrical warfare.

Robert Kadlec, President Bush's former special adviser on bio-defense policy, declined to comment on the commission's failing grade in the area in which he worked, saying there was still "ample opportunity to provide more focus and resources" for bio-preparedness in the administration's remaining three years. "This is a hard problem which deserves high priority," he said.

Two defenders of the administration's policies, both of whom asked not to be identified by name because they were speaking without authorization, said that the Obama White House gave bio-defense and countering nuclear proliferation high priority. 

One official said that Obama's second presidential security directive -- the first being the reorganization of the White House national security apparatus -- mapped out a national strategy to defend the nation against biological attacks. He also predicted that the administration would seek increases in its new budget for bio-defense and global surveillance programs.

Having been extended for one more year of work in 2009, the 9-member WMD Commission is disbanding after issuing this final report card. But staff members said that its chairman and vice-chairman intend to form a non-profit organization to continue pressing the government to do more to counter WMD threats.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/president/ci.Obama+Gets+%27F%27+on+Stopping+Spread+of+Weapons+of+Mass+Destruction.opinionPrint

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Al Qaeda Weapons of Mass Destruction Threat: Hype or Reality?

A Timeline of Terrorists' Efforts to Acquire WMD

Paper, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs

January 25, 2010

Author: Rolf Mowatt-Larssen , Senior Fellow, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs

PREFACE

Rolf Mowatt-Larssen spent more than two dozen years in intelligence, both in the CIA and U.S. Department of Energy. After the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, he led the U.S. government's efforts to determine whether al Qaeda had WMD capabilities and to prevent a nuclear terrorist attack on the United States. Mowatt-Larssen, now a senior fellow at Harvard Kennedy School's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, has put together a detailed timeline illustrating terrorists' efforts to acquire WMD.

INTRODUCTION

(Mowatt-Larssen's timeline follows in the attachment below.)

Several terrorist groups have actively sought weapons of mass destruction (WMD) of one kind or another. In particular, the Japanese cult group Aum Shinrikyo, al Qaeda and its associates -- notably the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, Jemaah Islamiya and Lashkar al Tayyib -- figure most prominently among the groups that have manifested some degree of intent, experimentation, and programmatic efforts to acquire nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. To date, however, al Qaeda is the only group known to be pursuing a long-term, persistent and systematic approach to developing weapons to be used in mass casualty attacks.

Osama bin Ladin's assertion in 1998 that it was his Islamic duty to acquire weapons of mass destruction ensured that the fulfillment of this intent would become a top priority for his lieutenants in the ensuing years. In an effort to explain his thinking to his followers, and to help guide their efforts, the al Qaeda leader has offered a number of statements that provide a need and rationale for using weapons of mass destruction as a means of achieving the group's concrete and ambitious goals. Most recently, he promised in a 2007 video release to "escalate the killing and fighting against you (Americans)" -- on grounds of destroying an international conspiracy to control the world -- adding, "The capitalist system seeks to turn the entire world into a fiefdom of the major corporations under the label of globalization in order to protect democracy."

These statements should not be interpreted as empty rhetoric and idle threats: Osama bin Ladin has signaled a specific purpose for using WMD in al Qaeda's quest to destroy the global status quo, and to create conditions more conducive to the overthrow of apostate regimes throughout the Islamic world. His argument is essentially that even weapons of mass destruction -- which are outlawed under Islam -- are a justifiable means of countering US hegemony. Osama bin Ladin's morality-based argument on the nature of the struggle between militant Islamists and the US-led coalition of secular forces focuses the group's planning on the acquisition of strategic weapons that can be used in mass casualty attacks, rather than on the production of tactical, more readily available weapons such as "dirty bombs," chemical agents, crude toxins and poisons.

In this light, it is not surprising that the group's top WMD priority has been to acquire nuclear and strategic biological weapons. Considering the potential that such weapons hold in fulfilling al Qaeda's aspirations, their WMD procurement efforts have been managed at the most senior levels, under rules of strict compartmentalization from lower levels of the organization, and with central control over possible targets and timing of prospective attacks. In this sense, their approach has been "Muhammed Atta-like" -- similar to the modus operandi Khaled Sheikh Mohammed employed in making preparations for the 9/11 attacks -- as opposed to resembling the signature characterizing most terrorist attacks to which the world has become accustomed.

Al Qaeda's patient, decade-long effort to steal or construct an improvised nuclear device (IND) flows from their perception of the benefits of producing the image of a mushroom cloud rising over a US city, just as the 9/11 attacks have altered the course of history. This lofty aim helps explains why al Qaeda has consistently sought a bomb capable of producing a nuclear yield, as opposed to settling for the more expedient and realistic course of devising a "dirty bomb," or a radiological dispersal device.

Another 9/11-scale operational plot managed by the al Qaeda core leadership was the development of anthrax for use in a mass casualty attack in the United States. The sophisticated anthrax project was run personally by al Qaeda deputy chief Ayman Zawahiri, in parallel to the group's efforts to acquire a nuclear capability; anthrax was probably meant to serve as another means to achieve the same effect as using a nuclear bomb, given doubts that a nuclear option could be successfully procured. Notably, al Qaeda's efforts to acquire a nuclear and biological weapons capability were concentrated in the years preceding September 11, 2001. Based on the timing and nature of their WMD-related activity in the 1990's, al Qaeda probably anticipated using these means of mass destruction against targets in the US homeland in the intensified campaign they knew would follow the 9/11 attack. There is no indication that the fundamental objectives that lie behind their WMD intent have changed over time.

On the other hand, the pursuit of crude toxins and poisons appears to have been of little interest to the al Qaeda leadership, even though the production of such weapons is easier and thus might seem more attractive for potential use in attacks. Although experimentation and training in crude chemical agents and pathogens was standard fare in al Qaeda's camps in Afghanistan before 9/11, their use in attacks appears to have been left to the initiative of individual cells and planners outside the direct supervision of the al Qaeda core leadership. Prominent examples of small-scale chemical- and biological- related activity include Midhat al-Mursi's (aka Abu Khabab) basic training for operatives in the al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan before 9/11; the Abu Musab al Zarqawi network's plotting to use ricin and cyanide in multiple attacks planned in Europe in late 2002-early 2003; and a Bahraini terrorist cell's plot to use a crude cyanide gas device called the "mobtaker" (an Arabic word roughly meaning "invention") in an attack on the New York City subway in the same time frame.

In each of these cases, the evidence suggests that the al Qaeda senior leadership was not directly involved or apparently even aware of attack preparations until late stages of planning. Moreover, there is no evidence that the al Qaeda leadership regarded the use of crude toxins and poisons as being suitable for conducting what would amount to pin prick attacks on the United States; on the contrary, Zawahiri canceled the planned attack on the New York City subway for "something better," suggesting that a relatively easy attack utilizing tactical weapons would not achieve the goals the al Qaeda leadership had set for themselves.

So, why hasn't a terrorist WMD attack happened since 9/11?

There are many plausible explanations for why the world has not experienced an al Qaeda attack using chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear weapons, but it would be foolish to discount the possibility that such an event will occur in the future. To date, al Qaeda's WMD programs may have been disrupted. This is in fact one likely explanation, given a sustained and ferocious counterterrorist response to 9/11 that largely destroyed al Qaeda as the organization that existed before the fateful attack on the US. If so, terrorists must continue to be disrupted and denied a safe haven to reestablish the ability to launch a major strike on the US homeland, or elsewhere in the world.

Or perhaps, al Qaeda operational planners have failed to acquire the kind of weapons they seek, because they are unwilling to settle for anything other than a large scale attack in the US. It would surely be hard for al Qaeda to lower the bar they set on 9/11: what would constitute a worthy follow-up to 9/11, on their terms? What would they achieve through another attack? There are few weapons that would meet their expectations in this regard. It is extremely difficult to acquire a functioning nuclear bomb, or to steal enough weapons usable material to build a bomb. And as al Qaeda probably learned in trying to weaponize anthrax, biological pathogens may seem simple enough to produce, but such weapons are not easy to bottle up and control. To complicate matters further, an attack on the scale of 9/11 is more difficult to accomplish in an environment of heightened security and vigilance in the US.

But if Osama bin Ladin and his lieutenants had been interested in employing crude chemical, biological and radiological materials in small scale attacks, there is little doubt they could have done so by now. However, events have shown that the al Qaeda leadership does not choose weapons based on how easy they are to acquire and use, be they conventional or unconventional weapons. They choose them based on the best means of destroying the specific targets that they have in mind. Al Qaeda's reasoning thus runs counter to analytic convention that equates the ease of acquisition of chemical, biological or radiological weapons with an increasing likelihood of terrorist use -- i.e., a terrorist attack employing crude weapons is therefore more likely than an attack using a nuclear or large scale biological weapon. In fact, it is the opposite: If perpetrating a large- scale attack serves as al Qaeda's motivation for possessing WMD, not deterrence value, then the greatest threat is posed by the most effective and simple means of mass destruction, whether these means consist of nuclear, biological, or other forms of asymmetric weapons.

An examination of the 9/11 attack sheds light on al Qaeda's reasoning behind the selection of specific weapons, and how that may apply to the role WMD plays in their thinking. Al Qaeda opted to pursue a highly complex and artfully choreographed plot to strike multiple targets requiring the simultaneous hijacking of several 747 jumbo passenger aircraft, because using airplanes as weapons offered the best means of attacking the targets they intended to destroy. If conventional wisdom on assessing WMD terrorism threats had been applied to considering the likelihood of the 9/11 plot, analysts may well have concluded it never would have happened; at the time, it was simply hard to believe any terrorist group could pull off such an elaborate plot utilizing novel, unpredictable weapons that were so difficult to acquire.

Yet, WMD terrorism skeptics abound, and for understandable reasons. There is widespread suspicion in America and abroad that WMD terrorism is another phony threat being hyped for political purposes, and to stoke fears among the public. It is difficult to debunk this allegation, given the US government's lack of credibility in the case of Iraqi WMD. That said, WMD terrorism is not Iraqi WMD. The case that the WMD terrorism threat is real bears no association with the Iraqi intelligence failure whatsoever, in terms of the reliability of the sources of intelligence, the quality of the information that has been collected, and the weight of the evidence that lies at the heart of our understanding of the threat. If anything, the biases in WMD terrorism analysis tilt towards treating the absence of information as an absence of threat; this could become a vulnerability in the defenses, considering the very real possibility that there may be a terrorist plot in motion that has not been found.

On the other side of the spectrum, even for the most ardent believers in the threat posed by WMD terrorism, it must be acknowledged that much of the rhetoric expressed by the top levels of the group might be just that: mere saber rattling in an increasingly desperate bid to remain relevant, to frighten their enemies, and to rally their followers with promises of powerful weapons that will reverse their losses on the battlefield. It is also possible that al Qaeda may be engaging in a classic deception ruse, hoping to misdirect their foe with fears of mass destruction, in order to preserve the element of surprise for the fulfillment of their true intentions.

There may be kernels of truth in each of these reasons as to why the world has not yet witnessed a terrorist WMD attack, which is at least a mild surprise, considering all that has come to pass since 2001. However, for purposes of making a clear-headed assessment of the threat, it may be useful to separate al Qaeda's WMD activity into two streams, one consisting of the strategic programs managed under the direct supervision and management of the al Qaeda core leadership, and the other consisting of tactical chemical, biological and radiological weapons development that was decentralized and pursued autonomously in various locations around the world as part of the "global jihad." On this basis, a more precise determination can be made on the actual threat posted by al Qaeda, and other groups in each of these cases.

Fortunately, there is a body of historical information that provides a useful starting point for such an inquiry. Hopefully, an examination of WMD-associated information that is pertinent, but no longer sensitive, can help bridge the gaps in perceptions between the diehard believers and skeptics as to the true nature of the problem and the threat it may pose, not just in an al Qaeda context today, but in the future as WMD terrorism takes on new forms involving new actors.

In June 2003, the US government issued a warning that there was a high probability of an al Qaeda WMD attack sometime in the next two years. This report represented a high water mark in concerns related to al Qaeda's WMD planning going back to the founding of the group. Why didn't an attack happen in the next two years? Was the threat hyped for political purposes? Was the intelligence assessment wrong? Or, was the threat neutralized? Some perspective into why the report was issued can be gleaned by examining some of the evidence that was available to US and international policymakers by the summer of 2003 concerning roughly fifteen years of al Qaeda's efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Presenting this chronology will hopefully allow the reader to develop a better feel for the threat posed by al Qaeda's interest in WMD at that time, and use it as a basis to help determine whether the WMD terrorism threat is real.

To continue reading the paper and to view a timeline of al Qaeda's efforts to acquire WMD, download the PDF below:

• Al Qaeda Weapons of Mass Destruction Threat: Hype or Reality?  (1004K PDF)

Neighbor Says Stacy Peterson Said 'I'm Already Dead'

Monday , January 25, 2010

JOLIET, Ill. — 

The neighbor sobbed uncontrollably at times as she spoke during the hearing meant to determine what, if any, "hearsay" evidence prosecutors can use during Peterson's upcoming trial on charges he murdered his third wife, Kathleen Savio, in 2004.

Sharon Bychowski told the court that she found Stacy Peterson, then 23, crying outside her suburban Chicago home. She explained how she had packed 10 boxes of Drew Peterson's clothes and asked her husband, 30 years her senior, to leave. But he'd refused.

"She said, 'If I disappear, Sharon, it's not an accident. He killed me,"' a visibly shaken Bychowski testified.

As Stacy Peterson described how she feared for her life, Bychowski advised her to put what she was saying in writing.

"It doesn't matter," Bychowski said Peterson told her. "I'm already dead. He's going to kill me."

At one point, the judge called a brief recess to allow Bychowski to regain her composure.

Peterson has pleaded not guilty in Savio's 2004 death. Officials exhumed her body and ruled her death a homicide only after Stacy Peterson vanished three years later. He hasn't been charged in her disappearance, but authorities say he's the only suspect.

Peterson, wearing a suit and sporting a full beard, listened attentively during Monday's proceedings — occasionally leaning to consult with his attorneys.

The focus of the pre-trial hearing, now in its second week, is the possible use of "hearsay" evidence in the Savio case.

Hearsay, or statements not based on the direct knowledge of a witness, usually isn't admissible in court. Illinois judges can allow it in murder trials if prosecutors prove a defendant may have killed a witness to prevent them from testifying. There's little available forensic evidence in Savio's case, so prosecutors are expected to rely on statements Savio allegedly made to others saying she feared Peterson could kill her.

But Bychowski is the latest witness to testify at length about Stacy Peterson.

She testified Monday that Stacy Peterson, despite expressing fears for her own life, never said anything about Savio's death or that she may have suspected Drew Peterson of killing Savio. Drew Peterson and Savio had divorced, and he had already married Stacy Peterson before Savio died.

Bychowski also testified that Stacy Peterson talked at length about her intention to divorce Peterson.

"She didn't love him anymore," Bychowski said. She added that, for Stacy Peterson, "having sex with him made her skin crawl."

Drew Peterson tried to dissuade his young wife from leaving by showering her with gifts, including a motorcycle and a ring, as well as by paying for breast enhancement surgery, Stacy Peterson allegedly told Bychowski. But holding up the ring at one point, she said, "'He thinks he's going to keep me. No way,"' Bychowski recalled.

Drew Peterson was so possessive of Stacy, he even installed a satellite GPS tracking system in her cell phone to monitor her movements by computer, Bruce Zidarich — a then-boyfriend of Stacy Peterson's sister, Cassandra Cales — also testified Monday.

In the initial investigation into Savio's 2004 death, retired Illinois State Police Sgt. Patrick Collins also testified last week that he never considered the possibility of murder. He said he never collected any forensics evidence from the home where her body was found in a bathtub.

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,583884,00.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

British Boy, 7, Raises Tens of Thousands for Haiti

Monday , January 25, 2010

LONDON — 

A young British schoolboy has raised nearly $160,000 for Haiti's relief effort.

Seven-year-old Charlie Simpson was so upset by the devastating images of Haiti's deadly earthquake that he asked his mother if she could help him set up a sponsored bicycle ride around his local park in west London.

Charlie originally hoped to raise $800 for UNICEF's Haiti appeal with Sunday's 5-mile bike ride, but his Internet page was flooded with donations.

He raised nearly 50,000 pounds in a single day and money is still flooding in after Charlie's story was splashed on the front page of Britain's Daily Mirror newspaper Monday.

His mother Leonora Simpson says she can't believe the public response.

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,583822,00.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From MSNBC

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Report: Al-Qaida aims to hit U.S. with WMDs

When al-Qaeda's No. 2 leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, called off a planned chemical attack on New York's subway system in 2003, he offered a chilling explanation: The plot to unleash poison gas on New Yorkers was being dropped for "something better," Zawahiri said in a message intercepted by U.S. eavesdroppers.

The meaning of Zawahiri's cryptic threat remains unclear more than six years later, but a new report warns that al-Qaeda has not abandoned its goal of attacking the United States with a chemical, biological or even nuclear weapon.

The report, by a former senior CIA official who led the agency's hunt for weapons of mass destruction, portrays al-Qaeda's leaders as determined and patient, willing to wait for years to acquire the kind of weapons that could inflict widespread casualties.

The former official, Rolf Mowatt-Larssen, draws on his knowledge of classified case files to argue that al-Qaeda has been far more sophisticated in its pursuit of weapons of mass destruction than is commonly believed, pursuing parallel paths to acquiring weapons and forging alliances with groups that can offer resources and expertise.

"If Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants had been interested in . . . small-scale attacks, there is little doubt they could have done so now," Mowatt-Larssen writes in a report released Monday by the Harvard Kennedy School of Government's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.

Deadly strains of anthrax

The report comes as a panel on weapons of mass destruction appointed by Congress prepares to release a new assessment of the federal government's preparedness for such an attack. The review by the bipartisan Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism is particularly critical of the Obama administration's actions so far in hardening the country's defenses against bioterrorism, according to two former government officials who have seen drafts of the report.

The commission's initial report in December 2008 warned that a terrorist attack using weapons of mass destruction was likely by 2013.

Mowatt-Larssen, a 23-year CIA veteran, led the agency's internal task force on al-Qaeda and weapons of mass destruction after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and later was named director of intelligence and counterintelligence for the Energy Department. His report warns that bin Laden's threat to attack the West with weapons of mass destruction is not "empty rhetoric" but a top strategic goal for an organization that seeks the economic ruin of the United States and its allies to hasten the overthrow of pro-Western governments in the Islamic world.

He cites patterns in al-Qaeda's 15-year pursuit of weapons of mass destruction that reflect a deliberateness and sophistication in assembling the needed expertise and equipment. He describes how Zawahiri hired two scientists -- a Pakistani microbiologist sympathetic to al-Qaeda and a Malaysian army captain trained in the United States -- to work separately on efforts to build a biological weapons lab and acquire deadly strains of anthrax bacteria. Al-Qaeda achieved both goals before September 2001 but apparently had not successfully weaponized the anthrax spores when the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan forced the scientists to flee, Mowatt-Larssen said.

"This was far from run-of-the-mill terrorism," he said in an interview. "The program was highly compartmentalized, at the highest level of the organization. It was methodical, and it was professional."

'Not just trying to scare people'

Mowatt-Larssen said he has seen no evidence linking al-Qaeda's program with the anthrax attacks on U.S. politicians and news outlets in 2001. Zawahiri's plan was aimed at mass casualties and "not just trying to scare people with a few letters," he said.

Evidence from al-Qaeda documents and interrogations suggests that terrorists leaders had settled on anthrax as the weapon of choice and believed that the tools for a major biological attack were within their grasp, the former CIA official said. Al-Qaeda remained interested in nuclear weapons as well but understood that the odds of success were much longer.

"They realized they needed a lucky break," Mowatt-Larssen said. "That meant buying or stealing fissile material or acquiring a stolen bomb."

Bush administration officials feared that bin Laden was close to obtaining nuclear weapons in 2003 after U.S. spies picked up a cryptic message by a Saudi affiliate of al-Qaeda referring to plans to obtain three stolen Russian nuclear devices. The intercepts prompted the U.S. and Saudi governments to go on alert and later led to an aggressive Saudi crackdown that resulted in the arrest or killing of dozens of suspected al-Qaeda associates.

After that, terrorists' chatter about a possible nuclear acquisition halted abruptly, but U.S. officials were never certain whether the plot was dismantled or simply pushed deeper underground.

"The crackdown was so successful," Mowatt-Larssen said, "that intelligence about the program basically dried up."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35072269/ns/us_news-security/print/1/displaymode/1098/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

U.S. Authorities Worried About Female Suicide Bombers

U.S. national-security officials say that that in Al Qaeda and its affiliates' efforts to figure out ways to circumvent security measures imposed by American and allied governments, they may be considering, and even plotting, using female suicide bombers.

The possibility that female terrorists could be part of a future, or even the next wave, of Al Qaeda plots against American targets inside or outside the United States is a live one, said three U.S. officials familiar with current threat reporting and analysis, who asked for anonymity when discussing sensitive information. One of the officials said that in the weeks since Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab allegedly attempted to bring down a U.S.-bound transatlantic flight with a bomb hidden in his underpants, investigators in Detroit, where Abdulmutallab's plane was headed, have been particularly worried about the possibility of a follow-up attack by a female suicide bomber. An ABC News report last week alleged that American law-enforcement officials have been told to be on the lookout for female suicide bombers who may attempt to enter the United States. The network quoted one official saying that at least two such women are believed to be connected to Al Qaeda in Yemen and may have a non-Arab appearance and be traveling on Western passports.

Another official told NEWSWEEK there is no intelligence reporting indicating any specific date, time, place or method for an imminent attack inside the U.S. by female attackers. But given the ingenuity and innovation Al Qaeda's Yemen-based affiliate demonstrated in crafting and deploying the kind of well-concealed, nonmetallic device carried by Abdulmutallab, the official said investigators have to be concerned that Osama bin Laden and his followers and imitators are brainstorming ever more exotic methods of foiling Western security precautions and that using female suicide bombers is one tactic that U.S. authorities certainly cannot rule out.

A third official noted that "the enemy will keep testing our defenses in new and creative ways," adding that female suicide bombers have been used by Islamic militants in the past . According to one U.S. government assessment of terrorism trends in 2008, 9 percent of suicide bombers worldwide were female and 15 percent in Iraq were female. Among the first terror groups to use women as suicide bombers was the Sri Lanka-based Tamil Tigers, who recent abandoned their campaign of violence. But experts say female suicide attackers have figured in attacks in places ranging from the Middle East to Iraq and Russia.

In 2003 and 2004, Chechen female suicide bombers nicknamed Black Widows were implicated in numerous deadly attacks against Russian targets, including subway and airplane bombings. Particularly worrying to U.S. and European investigators is that terrorist groups might succeed in recruiting American or European female suicide attackers. Officials point to the example of a Belgian woman who married a radical jihadist, converted to Islam, and then blew herself up in a suicide attack in Baghdad in 2005 . For U.S. and European authorities, a woman attacker of Western ethnicity and European or U.S. nationality would be a nightmare, since such a person would have easy passage through both European and American border controls and might be unknown to Western intelligence agencies.

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/declassified/archive/2010/01/25/u-s-authorities-worried-about-female-suicide-bombers.aspx?print=true

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

U.S. selling weapons to Taiwan

WASHINGTON - The Obama administration has notified Congress that it has decided to sell weapons to Taiwan, a move expected to worsen already tense ties between China and the United States, senior congressional aides said Monday.

China considers Taiwan a renegade province and will vehemently object to the arms package, which is likely to include UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters, Patriot Advanced Capability-3 missiles and material related to Taiwan's defense communications network.

The aides said the administration has been consulting with Congress about Taiwan's defense needs ahead of a formal announcement of the sale. Meetings began last week and are continuing this week.

The aides, who have direct knowledge of the meetings, spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of arms sales to Taiwan and because the notification is not yet official.

The package appears to dodge a thorny issue: The aides say the F-16 fighter jets that Taiwan covets are not likely to be included.

The sale would satisfy parts of an $11 billion arms package originally pledged to the self-governing island by former President George W. Bush in 2001. That package has been provided in stages because of political and budgetary considerations in Taiwan and the United States. The aides say it is unclear when an official announcement will come but that it could be soon.

The sale has been widely expected, and Beijing has already warned of a disruption in ties with Washington.

Taiwan is the most sensitive matter in U.S.-China relations, with the potential to plunge into conflict two powers increasingly linked in security and economic issues. Many in Washington expect that a temporary break in military ties is inevitable.

China vows to eventually bring Taiwan under its control and aims more than 1,000 ballistic missiles at the island; the U.S. government, on the other hand, is bound by law to ensure the island is able to respond to Chinese threats.

The arms sale package will test the Obama administration's China policy, which U.S. officials say is meant to improve trust between the countries, so that the inevitable disagreements over Taiwan or Tibet don't reverse efforts to cooperate on nuclear standoffs in Iran and North Korea, and attempts to deal with economic and climate change issues.

It was only in November that President Barack Obama met with Chinese leaders in an attempt to secure cooperation on global hotspots. Since then, tensions have spiked, with the United States criticizing Chinese Internet freedom and China worrying over a possible meeting next month between Obama and the Dalai Lama, the Tibetan spiritual leader China accuses of pushing for independence.

The United States also faults China's double digit annual percentage increases in defense spending. Washington has said that China's massive defense spending would spur continued U.S. arms sales to Taiwan to maintain a military balance in the potentially dangerous Taiwan Strait.

In 2008, China suspended most military dialogue with Washington after the Bush administration approved a $6.5 billion arms package to Taiwan that included guided missiles and attack helicopters.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35065824/ns/world_news-asiapacific/print/1/displaymode/1098/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the White House

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Faces of Recovery

As we've been following CNN's Stimulus Project coverage this week, we've noticed that, like us, they're meeting Americans across the country who are finding work, growing their businesses, buying their first homes and receiving needed financial assistance thanks to the Recovery Act.  Here is just a sampling of some of the people who have told CNN the Recovery Act is making a difference for their families and their communities.

Michael Johnson of Orlando, FL said the Recovery Act's Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-housing Program is “truly is an impactful program.” “This truly is an impactful program. That my kids could wake up in their own rooms on Christmas morning and walk out to the Christmas tree. I mean we never thought we'd have a place to put a Christmas tree.” [CNN, 1/25/10]

Bobby Jones, a general foreman from Aiken, SC said the Recovery Act is "keeping [him] employed.” “I'm working on the DUO project (depleted uranium oxide), I was in D&D (deactivation and decommissioning) and I moved over here [to DOE's Savannah River Site] in October. They needed someone to run the night shift so I came over. It's still stimulus funded and it's keeping me employed.” [CNNMoney.com, 1/25/10]

Wellington Hall a traffic engineer from Providence, RI said “none of this would be possible without the stimulus and I'm very grateful for that.” “I just got assigned as a project manager of a highway safety improvement project -- the goal is to identify intersections with high crash rates and work with consultants to mitigate accidents and make them safer. It feels good to know that these are some of the roads I drive on and that my coworkers and friends drive on. It feels good to know I'm making an impact. Right now I'm working on other things too, like using renewable energy to save on electrical costs. There are always things to keep me busy. This job has definitely helped me. I bought a house in august with my fiancé, got engaged in November and graduated last week. None of this would be possible without the stimulus and I'm very grateful for that. We're planning on getting married sometime in 2011.” [CNNMoney.com, 1/25/10]

Officer Patrick Dunn of Englewood, CO said that “If it wasn't for the stimulus I probably wouldn't have been hired.” “If it wasn't for the stimulus, I probably wouldn't have been hired. We had one income. My wife has been supporting the whole income. We have three kids. I have a 6, 5 1/2-year-old daughter and 20-month-old twins. There was a lot of pressure put on her.” [CNN, 1/25/10]

Officer Eddie Blackwell of Englewood, CO says the Recovery Act “gave [him] a golden opportunity to become a police officer.” “The stimulus package opened the opportunity, gave me a golden opportunity to become a police officer. I jumped on it.” [CNN, 1/25/10]

Chief Tom Vandermee of Englewood, CO believes the Recovery Act “has been extremely rewarding for [his] community.” “Our slice of this stimulus package, I can tell you, has been extremely rewarding for this community.” [CNN, 1/25/10]

Troy Cooper, an electrician from Coatesville, PA says the Recovery Act is “definitely going to help” him re-hire workers he was forced to lay off last year. “What we're doing has some of the incentive money built into it, so I say, yeah it's definitely going to help. Hopefully within the next month or so I'll be able to start bringing people back on from layoff.” [CNN, 1/25/10]

Richard Bennett an Iraq War veteran and the President Fidelias Design and Construction from Coatesville, PA says the opportunity he now has because of the Recovery Act “feels amazing, almost surreal.” “Now I'm president of a multimillion dollar construction company. It feels amazing, almost surreal.” [CNN, 1/25/10]

Patricia Dunn, a nurse practitioner from Mount Kisco, NY says the Recovery Act “made it possible for [her] to have this job.” “I had wanted to work for this organization six months prior to being offered my current position. They had a part-time opening but I needed full-time. When the [stimulus] funding came through, they offered me a position. Without a doubt, the funding made it possible for me to have this job. We've also, through stimulus, been able to hire more employees and that's great. The organization has hired several new physicians who started a few months ago.” [CNNMoney.com, 1/25/10]

Valatisha Jacinto, a school teacher from Waco, TX, “never thought anything that good would ever happen to her” before she was able to buy a house with an $8,000 Recovery Act tax credit through the first-time homebuyers program. "Thanks to the $8,000 tax credit for first-time homebuyers, in March, Valatisha bought a three-bedroom, two-bath home for $105,000. She took out a 4.9% FHA-insured 30-year loan, putting her monthly expenses, including property taxes and insurance, at just $830. She says, 'I never thought anything that good would happen to me.'" [CNNMoney.com, 1/25/10]

Rob Logan from Ypsilanti, MI “wouldn't have been able to afford [his] house” without the Recovery Act.

Rob bought his Ypsilanti, Mich., house for $71,000 in October because of the $8,000 tax credit for first-time homebuyers. "I wouldn't have been able to afford my house without it. It was one of the main reasons I started looking." [CNNMoney.com, 1/25/10]

Chris Saliture from St. Paul, MN says the Recovery Act is “what got [him] started” looking for a house. "For Chris, the $8,000 tax credit for first-time homebuyers credit was vital. 'That's what got me started. I knew the incentive program was going on. I may still have looked, but this had an impact on what I could afford." [CNNMoney.com, 1/25/10]

Liz Oxhorn is Recovery Act Communications Director

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/01/26/faces-recovery

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

CNN Sets the Record Straight

Last month, two Senators – who, by the way, opposed the Recovery Act from the beginning – released a report claiming that Recovery Act funds have largely been wasted or mismanaged and the program is not working.  Curiously, their report came just as we learned the economy had begun to grow again for the first time in more than a year – something many economists say is largely due to the Recovery Act – and right after the Congressional Budget Office, Congress's nonpartisan research arm embraced by Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle, said that the Recovery Act was already responsible for well over 1 million jobs.  At the time, we debunked many of the claims in the report. 

But CNN recently decided to find out for themselves – and the verdict couldn't be more clear:

“But we took a closer look at the Senators' top ten examples of so-called waste, we found nine of the ten did not tell the whole story and in some cases were inaccurate.”  [CNN, 1/25/10]

You may recall the Senators' claim at the time that: “The tranquil hamlet of Bainbridge Island, Washington, received $190,000 to upgrade a patrol boat for which it has little need—while it considers downsizing its police force.” [McCain/Coburn Stimulus Checkup, 12/8/10] 

• Not true, Lt. Bob Day of the Bainbridge Island Police Department told CNN: 
  • “There's some technology we'll be getting with this grant that is going to be able to help us better protect the port and to share information with port security partners.”  [Lt. Bob Day, CNN, 1/25/10]
• In fact, Lt. Day questions whether the two Senators understand security priorities:
  • “Unless Senators Coburn and McCain think that homeland defense and port security is something that really isn't important and it isn't a priority, I would take exception with their estimate on that.”  [Lt. Bob Day, CNN, 1/25/10]
• And notes the purchase supports jobs:
  • “The vendors we're working with, it's keeping their people employed.”  [Lt. Bob Day, CNN, 1/25/10]
• CNN's verdict?
  • “[T]hey called the upgrade to this boat unnecessary in a small town they call a tranquil hamlet. But more than 6 million passengers travel each year on the ferry between Bainbridge island and Seattle.  City officials say the ferry system is a high risk security target and the stimulus money a valid investment. The Department of Homeland Security agrees.” [CNN, 1/25/10]

And then there was the Senators' claim that: An “almost empty mall” was awarded an energy grant to install a geothermal heating and cooling system. [McCain/Coburn Stimulus Checkup, 12/8/10]

• Not true, developer Dave Thrash told CNN - the mall already has three department stores committed to the new project:
  • “We're not going to heat an empty mall. We're developing the property into a modern open-air center, and the goal is to deploy this technology into the commercial space.”  [Dave Thrash, CNN, 1/25/10]
• In fact, the project will create more than 200 jobs and cut costs the Department of Energy's Matt Rogers notes:
  • “Jobs, cost and innovation. What made us excited were the ability to create more than 200 jobs for just the construction of this project…. And in the particular technology that they are using here is an innovative approach to ground source heat pumps that actually makes the capital cost lower.”  [Matt Rogers, CNN, 1/25/10]

If this were the first time the Senators had released a report on the Recovery Act that had more holes than a block of Swiss cheese, it might be easier to consider this a simple case of confusion.  But we aren't talking about a great track record with accuracy here.  The last time the Senators went through this exercise, more than half of the items in that report turned out to be false or misleading claims as well – while other projects attacked included medical research to help hearing impaired children, and a state of the art project to create jobs in advanced technology.

While this may have been an entertaining exercise for the two Senators, the underlying issues here could not be more serious.  Last year, we faced the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression – and while others, including the two Senators, would have preferred to do nothing, we chose to act through the Recovery Act and other economic rescue efforts.  Nearly a year later, the evidence is now undeniable that the Recovery Act is working to create jobs and drive economic growth across the country.  In fact,  the CBO now says the Recovery Act is responsible for as many as 2.4 million jobs through projects like these:

• In Oklahoma , the Recovery Act is helping build new flood-control dams and repair old, unsafe, and obsolete dams across the state – a move that not only creates jobs, but saves taxpayer dollars usually spent cleaning up floods. 
• In Arizona , a local company is putting $99 million in Recovery funds, which were matched by an equal amount of private capital, to launch the largest deployment of electric vehicles and charging infrastructure in U.S. history – an effort the company says will create an additional 750 position across multiple states. 

The question is not whether the Recovery Act is money well-spent.  Everyone from independent economists and the CBO to Republican and Democratic governors and workers across the country on the job at Recovery projects says that it is.  The question is whether critics like the two Senators will finally admit that they were wrong to oppose this vital job-creating legislation - and that it's working in Arizona, Oklahoma and across the country.

Liz Oxhorn is Recovery Act Communications Director

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/01/26/cnn-sets-record-straight

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

State of the Union 2.0

When President Obama walks into the Capitol on Wednesday to deliver his State of the Union speech, millions of American viewers will tune in. It is a unique moment for the President to address the public on a broad spectrum of issues, including economic recovery and job creation.  Of course, many Americans will react to the speech with questions, comments, and concerns.

From our live webstream to a free iPhone app , the White House is using technology to make sure the President's State of the Union Address reaches as many people as possible.  Now we are excited to announce how President Obama will also be using the web to offer the public a direct and participatory way to communicate back to him.

After the President's speech begins this Wednesday (1/27) at 9pm EST, anyone will be able to submit a follow-up question and vote on others at YouTube.com/CitizenTube .  Then next week, the President will answer questions in a special online event, live from the White House.

Don't miss the speech at 9pm EST on Wednesday night and the chance to follow-up with your questions.  We look forward to hearing what you have to say

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/01/25/state-union-20

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From ICE

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ICE shares more than $2 million with Texas law enforcement partners

Local law enforcement credited for critical assistance in several federal cases

LAREDO, Texas - U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on Monday distributed more than $2 million in "asset sharing" funds, which were seized from various bulk cash smuggling investigations, to the Laredo Police Department and the Webb County Sheriff's Office.

ICE Special Agent in Charge Jerry Robinette presented poster-size checks to Laredo Police Chief Carlos Maldonado and Webb County Sheriff Martin Cuellar. Both agency heads participated in a news conference hosted by ICE. The $2,024,073.22 distributed was seized from four local investigations. The monies are divided among the participating agencies as part of ICE's asset sharing agreement. Of the total distributed, Laredo Police Department received $1,356,068.22 and Webb County Sheriff's Office received $668,005.

In poetic justice fashion, the seized monies are distributed to local law enforcement budgets so the agencies can continue to fund the expensive work of fighting crime and keeping our streets safe.

"ICE is especially proud to recognize the key role that our local law enforcement partners play in addressing the significant threat illegal bulk cash smuggling poses," said Robinette, who heads the ICE Office of Investigations in San Antonio. "Seizing this money from criminals and giving it to local law enforcement sends the right message to the public and to criminal organizations. These funds allow Webb County Sheriff's Office and the Laredo Police Department to continue their excellent work."

"When we seize contraband from criminals and smuggled goods at our ports, we take bad things off the street. When there is less of what is bad, we make things better for the good of all," said Congressman Henry Cuellar. "I thank ICE and the local law enforcement agencies for their collaborative efforts."

"The Laredo Police Department is committed to the continued battle against criminal drug organizations and to further our successful collaborations with ICE," said Laredo Chief of Police Carlos Maldonado. "The collaborative effort in this case demonstrates how the Laredo law enforcement community works collectively towards not only making effective arrests but also taking the money away from the criminal organizations and instead using that money to further ensure the safety of the citizens of Laredo."

"This check serves as a symbol of the great working relationship between the law enforcement community here in Laredo," said Sheriff Cuellar. "The law-abiding citizens of Webb County shall rest assured that we will continue tracking down drug traffickers and others engaged in illegal activities."

U.S. Congressman Henry Cuellar also attended this news conference, along with representatives from the following agencies: the City of Laredo, U.S Customs and Border Protection's (CBP) Office of Field Operations and CBP's Laredo Border Patrol Sector.

Asset forfeiture is a powerful tool used by ICE and other law enforcement agencies to seize assets from criminal organizations in their illicit enterprises or acquired through criminal activity. Under the related equitable sharing program, federal, state and local law enforcement partners and foreign governments working with ICE in joint investigations can be eligible to receive a portion of the proceeds of a federal forfeiture, which fosters greater partnership and cooperation among agencies.

http://www.ice.gov/pi/nr/1001/100125laredo.htm

.