Other Political News

[Soldier4Christ]

Ohio's High Court Backs Property Owners

The Ohio Supreme Court ruled unanimously on Wednesday that economic development isn't a sufficient reason under the state constitution to justify taking homes, putting a halt to a $125 million project of offices, shops and restaurants in a Cincinnati suburb that officials said would create jobs and add tax revenue.

The case was the first challenge of property rights laws to reach a state high court since the U.S. Supreme Court last summer allowed municipalities to seize homes for use by a private developer.

"For the individual property owner, the appropriation is not simply the seizure of a house," Justice Maureen O'Connor wrote in a case that pitted the city of Norwood against two couples trying to save their homes. "It is the taking of a home -- the place where ancestors toiled, where families were raised, where memories were made."

Property rights' advocates, business groups and backers of city planning were watching the Ohio case because of the precedent it could set. The ruling comes a year after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in a case from New London, Conn., that cities can take land for shopping malls or other private development.

Norwood wanted to use its power of eminent domain -- the authority to buy and take private property for public projects such as highways -- to seize properties holding out against private development in an area considered to be deteriorating.

In the ruling, O'Connor said cities may consider economic benefits but that courts deciding such cases in the future must "apply heightened scrutiny" to assure private citizens' property rights.

Targeting property because it is in a deteriorating area also is unconstitutional because the term is too vague and requires speculation, the court found.

O'Connor wrote that the court attempted in its decision to balance "two competing interests of great import in American democracy: the individual's rights in the possession and security of property, and the sovereign's power to take private property for the benefit of the community."

Dana Berliner, an attorney for the Arlington, Va.-based Institute for Justice that represented property owners in the case, said Wednesday's decision will have ramifications in high courts and legislatures across the country.

"This case is really part of a trend throughout the country of states responding to and rejecting the U.S. Supreme Court's Kelo decision last year," she said. "There are now 28 states that have taken legislative steps to protect owners more after that decision, and this case is the next movement in that trend, and I believe now not only legislatures but other courts are going to begin rejecting that terrible decision."

After the U.S. Supreme Court decision, Ohio declared a moratorium that prevents local governments from seizing unblighted private property for use by private developers until 2007. A legislative task force is expected to go ahead with reforms when it meets Aug. 31.

"I anticipate that many of our recommendations, combined with today's Supreme Court decision, will ensure that Ohio sends a strong message to its citizens that their private property rights are secure," said state Sen. Tim Grendell, chairman of the state's Eminent Domain Task Force.

Norwood Mayor Tom Williams defended the plan and said he still believes the project was lawful.

"I believed that we did that right thing then, I believe we did the right thing now," he said.

Tim Burke, a lawyer hired by Norwood, called the decision a significant disappointment and said it will halt progress on the planned development. He said the city likely will not appeal.

"Norwood, every step of the way, followed the law as it existed," Burke said.

Development interests in other areas -- particularly Cleveland's Flats development along Lake Erie -- signaled their intentions to proceed with plans that involve similar seizures.

"The Flats case is fundamentally different from the Norwood case and as such, we do not believe today's ruling will impact the outcome of our legal actions," the Port Authority and The Wolstein Group said in a joint statement.

Berliner called Norwood emblematic of development trends across the country.

"This was a perfect example of what is going on all over the country: a perfectly nice, working class neighborhood with no tax delinquencies, no falling down buildings, a nice neighborhood of homes and businesses, that a developer thought could be much more profitable as an upscale shopping and high-end housing center," she said.

[Soldier4Christ]

Even the EPA thinks the EPA is being dumb

The Environmental Protection Agency's proposed changes to a public right-to-know program that tracks industrial pollution releases is a bad idea, an EPA advisory board said in a letter sent to the agency head this month.

The letter from the EPA's Science Advisory Board Environmental Economics Advisory Committee enumerated multiple problems with the plan to raise the amount of pollution emitted before it has to be reported and to require reports every two years, instead of annually.

Changes to the program, known as the Toxics Release Inventory, or TRI, would:
- obscure the amount of pollution being pumped into the air and dumped into waterways.
- make it more difficult to track the health effects of pollution on people.
- eliminate research on yearly emissions.

According to the letter sent to EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson:

    "TRI data are widely used to evaluate changes in facility and firm environmental performance, to conduct risk assessments of changes in toxic release levels, and to conduct spatial analyses of toxic hazards. The TRI data provide the only reliable source of longitudinal data for this type of research."

The EPA has said that the idea makes sense, that it can help businesses save money by making the tracking of pollution less onerous (see more on this in an October P-I story by Robert McClure).

Those opposed, including other government officials, say the program encourages businesses to cut their emissions and that loosening requirements could weaken that incentive. Others opposed include the Society of Environmental Journalists, some 122,000 commenters on its official docket, the GOP-controlled House of Representatives, and 23 of the 50 states.

In Seattle alone, paint companies, shipyards and other industries released more than 126,000 pounds of solvents, lead and other crud in 2004, as I reported in this story.

[Soldier4Christ]

US Senate panel ties Peru trade pact to beef issue

The Senate Finance Committee voted unanimously on Thursday to require Peru to fully reopen its market to U.S. beef before a trade pact between the two countries would take effect.

Peru, like many other countries, shut down beef trade from the United States more than two years ago after a case of mad cow disease was found in Washington state.

Lima has taken some steps to resume beef trade, but continues to "arbitrarily block U.S. beef products from cattle aged greater than 30 months. That's unacceptable," Sen. Kent Conrad, a North Dakota Democrat.

The Senate panel approved Conrad's amendment requiring Lima to fully reopen its market to U.S. beef before the trade pact would go into effect.

Everett Eissenstat, assistant U.S. trade representative for the Americas, said the Bush administration already "had every intention" of holding Peru to those terms.

The provision was expected to become part of a bill the White House will send to Congress to implement the Peru agreement.

U.S. trade law bars Congress from formally amending agreements negotiated by the White House. But key congressional panels are given a chance to help the White House shape implementing legislation for trade pacts.

Peru's Congress ratified the deal last month, and outgoing President Alejandro Toledo signed it. 

The Senate Finance Committee, on a 10-10 tie vote, defeated a Democratic Party amendment to toughen the pact's labor provisions by requiring Peru to abide by core International Labor Organization standards.

Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, complained the Bush administration had decided not to include such a provision even though Toledo had publicly said Peru could accept it.

Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, an Iowa Republican, told reporters he expected final Senate action on the agreement when Congress returns in September from a month-long break.

Democratic Party concerns that the pact's labor provisions are not strong enough would make final approval tough, "but not impossible," Grassley said.

The House also could vote on the pact in September, but Republican leaders may wait until after the November congressional elections to take up the pact.

[Soldier4Christ]

Tennessee judges facing voter review
Next week's election called 'a farce' due to jurists' refusal to answer questions


An estimated 300,000 Tennessee families have been asked to review their level of trust in dozens of appellate court judges, most of whom wouldn't answer a short series of questions about their judicial philosophy as they seek voter permission to stay in office.

The e-mail campaign was organized by the Family Action Council of Tennessee, in preparation for the judges' retention vote on the primary ballot on Thursday, Aug. 3.

"These judges are asking for our vote to sit in judgment over us, but they don't want us to form any judgments about them based on information that we should be able to get," David Fowler, a 12-year state senator and the council's chief executive, said in an interview with WorldNetDaily.

For years, the annual judges "retention" vote has come and gone in many states with little reaction from voters. But because of the action of a few judges like those in Massachusetts who discovered a constitutional right to homosexual marriage and those in Tennessee who found a constitutional right to abortion, suddenly the philosophies of those individuals on the bench have become important, Fowler said.

So his group, in conjunction with the state Right to Life political action committee and with assistance from Christian ministry powerhouses American Family Association, the Eagle Forum and Focus on the Family, sent the information packets about the judges via e-mail to lists that crossed the state.

The survey questions were worded carefully and the judges were not asked to take a position on a future case. For example, the judges were asked which former president best represented their political philosophy: Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush, Ronald Reagan or Gerald Ford. They also were asked whether they agreed with the statement that there is no provision in the Tennessee Constitution requiring the public to pay for abortions.

However, with only a few exceptions, the judges responded with a uniform refusal to answer, Fowler said. One judge simply scrawled the following across the request for information, and returned it:

"Mr. Fowler – Thank you for your interest in an informed vote. For more information about my life and experience, please see deedavidgayforjudge.com." On that website, however, Gay does quote Ronald Reagan, "If we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under."

Fowler said the problem is partly the appointment and retention system. Judges are appointed in most states by a governor or judicial panel, but at the same time many of those state constitutions call for judges to be elected. That's addressed by having "retention" elections, in which voters are asked only whether a judge should remain on the bench.

And while the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that judges have a right to speak out on issues of the day, they generally have declined to do so. In fact, the bar association asked Tennessee judges to make a commitment not to answer questions about themselves.

"The bar association basically asked them to retreat from the rights they had and continue under the guise of impartiality," Fowler said. "It does fit with the view of some judges that if they don't like the law they'll either disregard it or change it."

However, that leaves voters wondering whether a judge seeking another term on the bench will follow the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law, or not, he said.

Fowler said his hope is that the 300,000 packet recipients will share them, and 700,000 or 800,000 voters will be able to review the questions to the judges, and their responses, in time for the election.

About half of the judges surveyed ignored the questions entirely; the other half generally sent letters explaining they didn't want to answer. Two state Supreme Court justices up for retention votes, Chief Justice William Barker and Justice Janice Holder, wrote letters.

"I agree with you and your organization that judges at all levels should be accountable – indeed, they should be accountable to our constitutions and to the rule of law," Barker wrote. Then he went on to cite his positions in previous cases regarding the death penalty and abortion. He did note there are some issues likely to come before the court he wouldn't want to discuss.

Holder, meanwhile, enclosed some biographical information and said her judicial philosophy "can best be determined" by reading her published opinions. "I conclude that I cannot respond directly to the questions contained in your survey," she wrote.

Fowler said he wanted to distribute the information, even though incomplete, to let people know as much as possible. "We’ve even encouraged some people to call the judges and say, 'I noticed you didn't answer the questions on the survey, but as a constituent I'd like to get some information from you.'"

Sunshine is good, he noted, and the more information voters have about all candidates, including those for the judiciary, the better.

"I don't wish ill on anyone," Fowler said. But if judges find their retention votes closer than expected, they might "realize that people did want the information."

The state Right to Life organization is utilizing the information in its specific campaign involving Barker and Holder. They were on opposite sides of the 2000 opinion where the state Supreme Court "found a right to an abortion in our state Constitution."

"If for example, (Justice) Barker, who dissented in the abortion case, he gets 60 plus percent, and Janice Holder, in the majority, gets 51 or 52 or 53 percent, I think it'll be a signal that people were paying attention," Fowler said.

Even some of those within the system agree there needs to be some light shed.

"This is a matter of judicial philosophy that every voter has a right to know about every retention ballot candidate; otherwise the 'election' is a farce," longtime attorney Larry Parrish told WorldNetDaily. "By a compact of silence, every retention ballot candidate respectfully has refused to share his or her judicial philosophy on this important issue. This, to me, is wrong; I know no other way to say it."

Spokeswoman Karen Burkhardt of Tennessee Right to Life said her group focuses on the issue of life, and in that, is highlighting the two Supreme Court justices who differed on the question of abortion.

"The problem here is that we have had a liberal administration for a number of years, and most of the judicial appointments have gone against the right-to-life movement," she said.

[Soldier4Christ]

Snow soft-pedals same-sex marriage
Says Bush will let voters decide in November which issues to emphasize


Presidential press secretary Tony Snow today passed up a chance to upbraid members of Congress who oppose a ban on same-sex marriage, saying simply that President Bush will allow voters to decide which issues to consider when choosing representatives at the polls in November.

At today's White House press briefing, WND asked: "The Washington state Supreme Court ruling against same-sex marriage follows similar court rulings in New York, Georgia, Connecticut, among seven state courts this month, while 45 states have passed laws that bar same-sex marriage. And my question, does the president believe that this issue on November the 7th should result in the public voting to remove a number of members of Congress who refuse to vote against same-sex marriage?"

Responded Snow: "The president wants to see Republican House and Senate re-elected and strengthened on the basis of issues. And he will let the voters determine what the proper issues are."

As WorldNetDaily reported today, 20 out of the 20 times the issue of marriage has come before voters, Americans have chosen to protect by constitutional amendment the idea of limiting the institution to one man and one woman. Voters in six more states will act on the issue this year.

WND also asked Snow: "Does the president believe that there is anything wrong or mistaken about 78 percent of France's power coming from nuclear plants, while our own government has not approved of even one new nuclear plant since the presidency of Jimmy Carter?"

"Actually," said the spokesman, "I think we do have a new permit that's in the works right now. The president does believe in nuclear power and he's been arguing for it, and he has actually cited France to some our European allies as a way to move forward."

[Soldier4Christ]

Nearly 300 state workers may be fired as tax scofflaws


OKLAHOMA CITY -- Nearly 300 state employees could be fired for failing to comply with Oklahoma's income tax laws.

The Oklahoma Tax Commission notified several state agencies this month that some of their employees have had three years to address tax problems and now face being fired under legislation passed in 2002.

"It's never our goal for people to lose their jobs, but to make them comply with the law, which makes it fair for those who do comply," said Paula Ross, a Tax Commission spokeswoman.

"It's particularly important for state employees who are paid with money from taxpayers."

State employees who are not in compliance with tax laws receive a notice from the commission with an explanation of the problem and a calculation of how much money they owe.

If the employee doesn't respond for six months, a letter is sent to the agency where the person is employed.

The process is repeated for three years. If the worker hasn't addressed the problem by then, he or she faces termination, Ross said.

At Oklahoma State University, where 20 workers were at risk of losing their jobs, 11 have been fired, said Gary Shutt, an OSU spokesman. Nine had already settled their taxes, he said.

"We complied with the state law," Shutt said. "The employees have known for three years that they were out of compliance. This didn't sneak up on anybody."

He said the employees had 30 days from the date they were fired to reapply for their jobs.

If they are rehired, their records will look as if the firings never happened, Shutt said.

Catherine Bishop, a University of Oklahoma spokeswoman, said the Tax Commission told OU that 17 Norman campus employees and 11 Health Sciences Center employees had not paid their taxes.

Some employees have since complied with the law, but eight Norman campus and five Health Sciences Center employees have yet to resolve their taxes, she said.

About a third of the state workers, or 92, at risk of losing their jobs are employed by the Department of Human Services, according to the Tax Commission.

However, Douglas Doe, a DHS spokesman, said the number was lowered to 67 after several employees came into compliance and others quit working for the agency.

No one has been fired so far because of the tax violations, Doe said.

"The critical thing to remember here is this is a state law, so we're obligated to take appropriate action under that law," he said. "We're trying to give the employees a fair shake and ensure all the information is accurate before we go down that road of termination proceedings."

The Department of Corrections had listed 18 noncompliant employees, but its spokesman Jerry Massie said the number was down to five. Seven have resigned, and the others are in compliance, he said.

"We're still checking on those five," Massie said. "We're going to ask the Tax Commission if they've come into compliance."

The Tax Commission also has listed 10 workers each at Tulsa Junior College and Langston University as being noncompliant.

[Soldier4Christ]

City considering dress code for teachers


The city, which already has a strict dress code for public school students, is considering implementing a similar one for teachers and other professionals in the school system.

The Board of Education is developing a policy that would ban such clothing as stretch pants, low-cut shirts, sun dresses, sandals and hats in the workplace. A draft proposal details the acceptable and unacceptable clothing, including what material is appropriate for pants, and would stipulate that skirts can rise no more than three inches above the knee. It would also ban facial piercings. The board plans to vote on the policy next month.

Some board members say the measure is necessary to reverse what they call slipping standards of professional dress.

"What you have here is a set of criteria that allows (principals) to make that call, and make that call consistently throughout the system," Ann Marie Sweeney a board member.

But the teachers' union says any rigid dress code would violate its contract with the city. That contract, which took effect July 1, states that principals should ensure that teachers wear "appropriate professional attire."

"For the Board of Education to add a laundry list of do's and don'ts regarding attire is simply insulting," said Patrick J. Ospalek, head of the Waterbury Teachers Association. "With student achievement being obviously the greatest concern, I think the board is simply wasting its time."

Waterbury's student dress code was the most extensive in Connecticut when it was enacted in 1998. It specifies what types and colors of tops and bottoms elementary and middle school students can wear, and prohibits clothing such as jeans, sweat pants and spandex.

Vincent Mustaro, a senior staff associate with the Connecticut Association of Boards of Education, said he couldn't name any locations in the state with a dress code for teachers. A few school districts inquire about the topic each year, he said, but his organization generally counsels against a specific dress code.

[Soldier4Christ]

'Home intruder' law vague to judge
Refuses to dismiss murder charge


A Fayette judge struggled to make sense of Kentucky's new "home intruder" law yesterday, calling the National Rifle Association-backed legislation confusing, vague and poorly written.

"I'm not quite sure that the drafters had even a marginal knowledge of criminal law or Kentucky law," Circuit Judge Sheila Isaac said. "It is absolutely silent on the court's role."

Isaac rejected James Adam Clem's request to have his murder charges dismissed because of the recently enacted law, which grants immunity to homeowners who use deadly force to defend themselves from robbers or intruders.

The law says a person has the right to use lethal force if he has "reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred." It also applies if a person is attacked in a public place "where he or she has a right to be."

Clem, 27, says he killed Keith Newberg, 25, in self-defense after Newberg allegedly attacked him upon entering Clem's apartment early in the morning of Aug. 9, 2004.

Isaac sided with prosecutors, who said that whether Newberg was an intruder or had committed a crime is a factual question that jurors must decide.

"To go into whether he is immune clearly requires fact-intensive decisions" that judges should not make, Isaac said.

Prosecutors around the state have expressed concerns about the law, which they say is difficult to interpret and raises numerous questions.

In an interview yesterday, University of Kentucky law professor Robert Lawson, widely considered the state's foremost expert on criminal law, sharply criticized the law. It was approved overwhelmingly by the General Assembly this spring, and it took effect this month.

"It is the worst legislation I have ever seen in 40 years," said Lawson, the principal drafter of Kentucky's penal code, which was adopted in 1975.

Supporters of Senate Bill 38, also called the castle doctrine, said that previous law required Kentuckians to retreat from robbers breaking into their home or car.

Not so, Lawson says: Unlike many states, Kentucky never had such an obligation.

When drafting the penal code, the General Assembly voted down such a requirement, he said.

A 1931 Kentucky Supreme Court decision, Gibson vs. Commonwealth, bluntly spells out the right of self-defense without retreat.

"It is the tradition that a Kentuckian never runs," the opinion states. "He does not have to."

May be state's 1st such case

Lawson said the home intruder law "is aimed at a problem that didn't exist" and will create "huge problems of interpretation."

The politically powerful NRA has convinced 15 states to pass castle-doctrine laws since 2005. The doctrine has its origins in English common law.

Supporters in the legislature, who acknowledge the NRA's influence in drafting the bill, say it is needed to protect homeowners from being sued or prosecuted for shooting intruders.

Yesterday, Judge Isaac and attorneys on both sides debated what the law means to Clem's case. It was the first time in Fayette County, and possibly the state, that the home intruder law has reached the courts.

The Kentucky Supreme Court has never ruled on the law, giving Isaac no precedent to follow. Because she is a circuit judge, her ruling does not create precedent, and it applies only to Clem's case.

Isaac said the law provides no guidance for how courts should apply the immunity provision, which bars police from even arresting somebody who defends himself.

It's not clear what the standard of proof is or how the burden of proof shifts, she said.

"We are all kind of treading on unknown water," she said.

Clem's trial starts Monday. Isaac said defense attorneys could refile their motion after prosecutors have presented their evidence.

Change in judges

Isaac is now presiding over the case. Judge Mary Noble recused herself this week.

A written order of recusal has not yet been entered. But Tucker Richardson, one of Clem's defense attorneys, contributed to Noble's Supreme Court campaign against Justice John Roach.

Noble previously has said she does not track who contributes to her campaign. Her campaign manager has said Noble learned of Richardson's donations only after the family of a victim in another case criticized her for not recusing herself in the trial of Keita Hayden, who was acquitted of murder charges.

[Soldier4Christ]

Republicans now want to raise minimum wage

Making an abrupt reversal just months before crucial congressional elections, House Republicans last night were working on a package that would raise the federal minimum wage to $7.25 an hour.

In a vote that could come today, GOP leaders have yielded to intense pressure from party moderates and virtually all Democrats to raise the minimum wage of $5.15 an hour for the first time since 1997.

But House Republicans want a minimum-wage increase tied to a measure that would allow small businesses to band together to buy health insurance for their workers. Organized labor and many Democrats oppose that plan, arguing that it would allow small companies to avoid state health-insurance mandates.

Rep. Deborah L. Pryce of Upper Arlington, the No. 4 House Republican who is facing a difficult race, said, "It's pretty obvious that we're going to try and do this before we leave. We're right in the middle of trying to put a package together that will provide relief to small businesses that raising the minimum wage would tend to hurt.''

Pryce and Republicans Pat Tiberi of Genoa Township and Steven C. LaTourette of Madison have pressed House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-West Chester, to agree to a floor vote on the minimum wage and the small business health plans before the August recess. Another Republican facing a difficult campaign, Rep. Bob Ney, of Heath, also has been pressing for a vote to raise the wage.

Republicans have been on the political defensive for the past few months as Democrats have assailed them for blocking an increase in the minimum wage. Although the U.S. Department of Labor estimates that only 1.9 million American hourly workers are paid the minimum wage or less, an increase is popular with voters.

While many small companies oppose an increase, they have signaled they would support a broader package that helps small businesses buy health insurance — a concept known as association health plans.

Amanda Wurst, a spokeswoman for Franklin County Commissioner Mary Jo Kilroy, Pryce's Democratic challenger, dismissed Pryce's support for the minimum wage as "just playing politics with the well-being of Ohio families.''

For Pryce, the move allows her to demonstrate her independence from President Bush and the conservatives who dominate the House. Jerry Austin, a Democratic consultant in Ohio, quipped that Pryce is so eager to distance herself from the Republicans that she might "be putting out literature that says, 'Vote for Deborah Pryce for Congress and Ted Strickland for governor,' '' a reference to the Democratic gubernatorial nominee who has a healthy lead in the Dispatch Poll.

But a number of Republicans doubt opposition to the minimum wage hurts them politically. Barry Bennett, chief of staff for Rep. Jean Schmidt, R-Loveland, said, "Of all the things we get mail about from our district — immigration, the pension bill, Iraq — we don't really hear a lot about the minimum wage. Not too many people work at minimum wage anymore. I don't think it gets you anywhere politically.''

The AFL-CIO and leading Democrats object to including the association health plans in any bill to boost the minimum wage. Rep. Steny Hoyer, the No. 2 House Democrat, said, "We already know that there is bipartisan majority support for increasing the minimum wage to $7.25, so Congress should pass that increase on a straight up-or-down vote and stop playing games.''

[Soldier4Christ]

 China planning to strengthen control of foreign acquisitions

The Chinese government is drawing up rules that will make it more difficult for overseas investors to buy Chinese assets, a move aimed at curbing inflows of foreign capital to cool China's soaring economic growth.
 
The Ministry of Commerce will be added to a list of government agencies that must review foreign takeovers and purchases of Chinese assets by offshore shell companies, according to a draft dated June 30.
 
The government will ban the sale of assets that "threaten China's economic safety," the document said.
 
The ministry declined to comment.
 
Prime Minister Wen Jiabao is trying to slow foreign investment after China's economic growth accelerated to 11.3 percent in the second quarter, the fastest pace in more than a decade.
 
"There is no doubt Beijing wants to tighten its control over foreign investors," said Kathleen Ng, managing director at the Center for Asia Private Equity Research, which is based in Hong Kong. "The country is trying to become less reliant on foreign capital."
 
China's credit rating was raised one level by Standard & Poor's on Thursday after the government improved bank finances and clamped down on lending as part of efforts to cool the economy.
 
S&P raised its long-term foreign and local currency rating to A from A minus, citing "persistent efforts to strengthen the banking sector" and the economy's "excellent growth prospects."
 
The rating on China's $33 billion worth of foreign currency debt is the sixth-highest, putting China at the same level as South Korea and Greece.
 
S&P raised its long-term credit ratings on China Development Bank and Export-Import Bank of China to A from A minus, the rating agency said. S&P also raised Hong Kong's long-term credit rating to AA from AA minus, citing improved credit fundamentals of "ultimate sovereign" China.
 
"Over all, it's a big endorsement" of the government's economic policies, said Liu Yang of Atlantis Investment Management in Hong Kong. "It will give comfort to investors who are purchasing Chinese assets. It also will drive interest in the banking system."
 
China has attracted more than $248 billion in foreign direct investment since joining the World Trade Organization in 2001, helping to stimulate the country's economic growth, which averaged 10 percent in the past three years.
 
The government tightened rules on overseas buyers of real estate this week and will raise the percentage of deposits banks must set aside as reserves on Aug. 15 to cool lending.
 
Yuan gains on dollar
 
The yuan rose 0.1 percent against the dollar in Shanghai on Thursday, the most since China scrapped a peg to the currency last summer after U.S. lawmakers threatened trade sanctions unless gains accelerated by Sept. 30, Bloomberg News reported from Beijing. The dollar fell to 7.9768 yuan.
 
The lawmakers, Senators Charles Schumer and Lindsey Graham, told Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson on Wednesday that they wanted to see the yuan appreciate or they would push ahead with legislation to impose a 27.5 percent duty on Chinese goods.
 

[Soldier4Christ]

U.S. wary of Shanghai grouping
China, Russia intensify efforts to isolate U.S. from Central Asia

 PRAGUE, July 27, 2006 (RFE/RL) -- A senior U.S. State Department official says the United States should not worry too much about any threat emerging from the six-nation Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which comprises China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan.

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Steven Mann reassured members of Congress at a hearing in Washington on July 25 by a House of Representatives' international relations subcommittee that he does not view the SCO, which is dominated by China and Russia, as an emerging threat to Western interests.

Excluding U.S. From Central Asia

Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (Republican-Florida) told the hearing that the SCO's summit in June provided evidence that Russia and China have intensified efforts "to isolate the U.S. politically, militarily, and economically from Central Asia."

Her comments follow pointed remarks last month by U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld that the United States should not be excluded from regional groupings, and he expressed surprise that Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad was invited to attend the SCO summit. The United States views Iran as a supporter of terrorism.

Mann acknowledged that the SCO had occasionally cut across U.S. interests; for instance, its 2005 summit called for Washington to set a timetable for the withdrawal of its military from Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan.

Uzbekistan subsequently asked the United States to leave, and Kyrgyzstan signed a deal with the United States greatly increasing the fees it receives for hosting U.S. forces.

Natural Rivalry

Mann said that since then the tone of the SCO towards U.S. bases in the region has become more constructive. As quoted by AP, he expressed confidence that contacts with major institutions like the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and NATO held enough interest for Central Asian members of the SCO to prevent them from developing a hostility toward the West.

Nevertheless, regional analysts say there remains a natural rivalry between the East and West for influence in Central Asia, particularly in view of its vast oil and gas reserves.

"The role of the Central Asian republics is as a kind of balancer between Russia and China [on the one hand] and the Western world [on the other], so it is a very important area for both sides, which strive to attract attention and offer cooperation [to the Central Asians]," says Keun-Wook Paik of the London-based Royal Institute of International Affairs:

Keun-Wook Paik says that despite Mann's suggestion to the congressional panel that the United States can be relaxed on the issue of the SCO's ability to undermine Western influence in Central Asia, the administration of President George W. Bush is actually "very nervous" about the possibility that the Russians and Chinese might gain ground.

It does not like to particularly see Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and Azerbaijan, in the Caucasus, falling under Moscow's or Beijing's spell, nor the plans for new gas pipelines from Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan going directly into China.

Conversely, Washington is in favor of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline inaugurated on July 13, which links the Azerbaijani oilfields with the Turkish Mediterranean port of Ceyhan, and which Kazakhstan also plans to join.

Democratic Values Vs. Realpolitik

One predicament for the West is the autocratic nature of the Central Asian regimes. At the congressional hearing, Mann described the U.S. strategic goal in Central Asia as "to support their development as fully sovereign, democratic, stable, and prosperous nations."

In the meantime, Washington has to deal with the dictatorial or semidictatorial regimes as they are, which has caused some disquiet among human rights advocates at home and abroad.

"It is a contradiction one sees in the foreign policies of many governments -- the United States is only one of them -- that on the one hand there are governments, individuals, institutions, organizations, in the way a country is run in different parts of the world, and the rest of the world has to trade and deal with them; to what extent do you want to stop because they are autocratic, or not 100 percent democratic," says analyst Manochehi Takin of the Center for Global Energy Studies. "Really, it's more of a so-called realpolitik."

Continuing on this theme, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Mann described Washington's relations with Central Asia as resting on three pillars: namely democratic reform, economic development, and security.

Singling out Kazakhstan, he said it is one of the leading performers in two of those divisions, but needs to improve its democratic life. Kazakhstan has been a focal point of U.S. diplomatic attention in Central Asia following the souring of relations with Uzbekistan.

[Soldier4Christ]

1,000 workers riot at Chinese factory
Poor working conditions alleged at company that makes toys for McDonalds

More than 1,000 workers rioted over poor working conditions at a southern China factory that produces toys for McDonald's and other firms, a U.S. labor rights group said Thursday.
 
The incident began last Saturday when workers at the Hengli Factory in Dongguan, Guangdong Province, protested over meager wages, lack of days off during public holidays and poor living conditions, the New York-based China Labor Watch said.
 
The protest began in workers' dorms and evolved into a riot that stretched into Sunday, the labor watchdog said in a statement. Many were injured and dozens of workers were arrested, according to China Labor Watch.
 
An official at the Hong Kong-based Merton, which owns the factory, said there had been an incident but declined to comment on the specific allegations.
 

[Soldier4Christ]

Senate: Drilling bill can't be altered


WASHINGTON - Senate leaders from both parties will not support offshore drilling legislation that deviates from a carefully worded compromise bill worked out by Gulf Coast senators, according to correspondence released Thursday by a Florida lawmaker.

Senators had sought to reassure Bill Nelson, D-Fla., that the Senate's narrowly tailored legislation would not be gutted if lawmakers had to reconcile the measure with a more expansive House-passed bill that would allow drilling closer to the Coast.

In an e-mail, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said he would not bring anything back to the Senate that "does not provide adequate protection to the state of Florida."

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said it was his expectation the House would accept the Senate's bill without any amendments or modifications.

"If the House does not accept the Senate bill as passed," Reid said in a letter, he would "produce the votes to sustain the filibuster to prevent the passage of the bill."

House leaders have indicated the Senate bill is unacceptable.

The Senate proposal would open an 8-million-acre tract of the Gulf of Mexico about 120 miles southeast of Biloxi, known as Lease Area 181, to oil and gas exploration. Drilling would be prohibited through 2022 within 125 miles of the Florida Panhandle and 230 miles off Florida's west coast.

The bill would also mean hundreds of millions of dollars in new royalty payments for Mississippi and three other Gulf Coast states.

The broader House bill would scrap a 25-year-old ban on drilling as close as 50 miles to the shore. Under the bill, states also could opt to allow drilling even closer, or ban all activity within 100 miles of the coast.

Despite Senate leaders' declarations that they would preserve their bill's coastal protections, on Thursday local environmental groups remained skeptical.

"We want simple language. We don't want to have to have an attorney to come and tell us what the bill says," said Robert Barq, chairman of the Twelve Miles South Coalition, which seeks to preserve Gulf Islands National Seashore.

"We're for drilling, we're for oil, we're for gas. But we don't want it on our shorelines," Barq said.

[Soldier4Christ]

Senate votes to extend statute of limitations
Bill adds 12 years to child sex abuse reporting period

The state Senate voted yesterday to extend the statute of limitations for child sex abuse claims by 12 years, raising hopes the Legislature will send the governor a bill before it recesses for the summer.

The Senate approved a bill passed by the House late Wednesday that would increase the statute of limitations from 15 to 27 years after the accusers' 16th birthday, giving them until they are 43 to report sexual crimes.

The House bill would also require sex offenders to register at least 10 days before they leave prison, verify that they are living in a homeless shelter within 45 days of release, and, among other provisions, require the most dangerous sex offenders who fail to register to submit to lifetime community parole supervision.

``We feel that we've passed the most sweeping sex offender legislation since the inception of the sex offender registry," said Representative Tom Golden, a Lowell Democrat who has been one of the bill's main supporters. ``We're closing loopholes, increasing penalties, and expanding the opportunities for prosecutions. It's all done to protect our citizens from these heinous crimes."

The Senate's version of the bill requires the state to establish nursing homes and other facilities for the most dangerous sex offenders. It requires sex offenders to wear global positioning satellite devices while on probation.

It would also delay the clock on the statute of limitations if the accuser does not come forward because of threats of physical violence, physical or psychological injury caused by the abuse, or any period where the defendant prevents witnesses or evidence from being available.

Kyle Sullivan, a spokesman for House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi, said he expects the legislation to be sent to Governor Mitt Romney by Monday.

Eric Fehrnstrom, Romney's spokesman, said the governor wants to sign a bill that would extend the statute of limitations.

``The administration's preference is to lift the statute of limitations entirely for victims of child sexual abuse, but this represents progress, and we look forward to receiving the bill," said Fehrnstrom.

Ed Saunders, executive director of the Massachusetts Catholic Conference, a lobbying organization that represents the Archdiocese of Boston, said the state's bishops support extending the statute of limitations.

He also said they would support delaying the statute of limitations as proposed by the Senate.

But he said they do not want to completely discard the statute of limitations.

``I think by eradicating the statute of limitations, you run into some due process issues," Saunders said. ``The accused must have the right to properly defend themselves."

Defense attorneys who represent accusers said the proposed legislation does not go far enough.

Carmen L. Durso, a Boston-based attorney who has represented more than 200 alleged victims of child sex abuse, said the bill should lengthen the statute of limitations for children 14 and older who have been sexually assaulted but not raped and for children age 16 and older who have been raped.

``The Legislature has made a very tentative step in the right direction, but in doing so, they have eliminated a group of people they have protected in the past," Durso said. ``That's a huge error, which I hope they will correct, and correct quickly."

Suffolk District Attorney Daniel F. Conley, who has long pushed for such legislation, said he will continue to push the Legislature to scrap the statute of limitations for child sex abuse.

``Far too often, prosecutors in my office and across the state have met with grown men and women who needed decades to learn that the abuse and exploitation they suffered as children was not their fault, only to find that the legal clock had stopped ticking years earlier and that their abusers had avoided accountability for their crimes," he said.

``It is because those victims now have, if not all the time we would hope, then at least more time than they have previously had, that I believe this compromise was good and worthwhile," Conley said.

[Soldier4Christ]

Dump Condi: Foreign policy conservatives charge State Dept. has hijacked Bush agenda

Conservative national security allies of President Bush are in revolt against Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, saying that she is incompetent and has reversed the administration’s national security and foreign policy agenda.

The conservatives, who include Newt Gingrich, Richard Perle and leading current and former members of the Pentagon and National Security Council, have urged the president to transfer Miss Rice out of the State Department and to an advisory role. They said Miss Rice, stemming from her lack of understanding of the Middle East, has misled the president on Iran and the Arab-Israeli conflict.

"The president has yet to understand that people make policy and not the other way around," a senior national security policy analyst said. "Unlike [former Secretary of State Colin] Powell, Condi is loyal to the president. She is just incompetent on most foreign policy issues."

The criticism of Miss Rice has been intense and comes from a range of Republican loyalists, including current and former aides in the Defense Department and the office of Vice President Dick Cheney. They have warned that Iran has been exploiting Miss Rice's inexperience and incompetence to accelerate its nuclear weapons program. They expect a collapse of her policy over the next few months.

"We are sending signals today that no matter how much you provoke us, no matter how viciously you describe things in public, no matter how many things you're doing with missiles and nuclear weapons, the most you'll get out of us is talk," former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said.

Miss Rice served as Mr. Bush's national security adviser in his first term. During his second term, Miss Rice replaced Mr. Powell in the wake of a conclusion by the White House that Mr. Bush required a loyalist to head the State Department and ensure that U.S. foreign policy reflected the president's agenda.

"Condi was sent to rein in the State Department," a senior Republican congressional staffer said. "Instead, she was reined in."

Mr. Gingrich agrees and said Miss Rice's inexperience and lack of resolve were demonstrated in the aftermath of the North Korean launch of seven short-, medium-, and intermediate-range missiles in July. He suggested that Miss Rice was a key factor in the lack of a firm U.S. response.

"North Korea firing missiles," Mr. Gingrich said. "You say there will be consequences. There are none. We are in the early stages of World War III. Our bureaucracies are not responding fast enough. We don't have the right attitude."

Several of the critics have urged that Mr. Bush provide a high-profile post to James Baker, who was secretary of state under the administration of Mr. Bush's father. They cited Mr. Baker's determination to confront Iraqi strongman Saddam Hussein in 1990.

A leading public critic of Miss Rice has been Richard Perle, a former chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board and regarded as close to Mr. Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Mr. Perle, pointing to the effort by the State Department to undermine the Reagan administration’s policy toward the Soviet Union in the late 1980s, has accused Miss Rice of succumbing to a long-time State Department agenda of meaningless agreements meant to appease enemies of the United States.

"Condoleezza Rice has moved from the White House to Foggy Bottom, a mere mile or so away," Mr. Perle wrote in a June 25 Op-Ed article in the Washington Post that has been distributed throughout conservative and national security circles. "What matters is not that she is further removed from the Oval Office; Rice's influence on the president is undiminished. It is, rather, that she is now in the midst of—and increasingly represents—a diplomatic establishment that is driven to accommodate its allies even when (or, it seems, especially when) such allies counsel the appeasement of our adversaries."

Mr. Perle's article was said to have reflected the views of many of Mr. Bush's appointees in the White House, Defense Department and State Department. Mr. Perle maintains close contacts to U.S. ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control Robert Joseph, Deputy National Security Advisor Elliot Abrams and Mr. Cheney's national security adviser, John Hannah.

A major problem, critics said, is Miss Rice's ignorance of the Middle East. They said the secretary relies completely on Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns, who is largely regarded as the architect of U.S. foreign policy. Miss Rice also consults regularly with her supporters on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Chairman Richard Lugar and the No. 2 Republican, Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska.

The critics said Miss Rice has adopted the approach of Mr. Burns and the State Department bureaucracy that most—if not all—problems in the Middle East can be eased by applying pressure on Israel. They said even as Hezbollah was raining rockets on Israeli cities and communities, Miss Rice was on the phone nearly every day demanding that the Israeli government of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert exercise restraint.

"Rice attempted to increase pressure on Israel to stand down and to demonstrate restraint," said Stephen Clemons, director of the American Strategy Program at the New America Foundation. "The rumor is that she was told flatly by the prime minister's office to back off."

The critics within the administration expect a backlash against Miss Rice that could lead to her transfer in wake of the congressional elections in 2006. They said by that time even Mr. Bush will recognize the failure of relying solely on diplomacy in the face of Iran's nuclear weapons program.

"At that point, Rice will be openly blamed and Bush will have a very hard time defending her," said a GOP source with close ties to the administration.