Other Political News

[Soldier4Christ]

California Senate Committee Rejects Measure to Legalize Assisted Suicide

A California state Senate committee has rejected a measure that would make the state the second, following Oregon, to legalize assisted suicide. The Senate Judiciary Committee voted Tuesday against the measure, meaning the legislation is dead for the rest of the legislative session.

The committee was dominated 3-2 by Democrats. Republican Sen. Tom Harman of Huntington Beach opposed the measure and committee chairman Sen. Joe Dunn, a Democrat from Santa Ana, joined him to defeat the proposal.

Democratic Sens. Martha Escutia of Whittier and Sheila Kuehl of Santa Monica voted for the bill but it died on a 2-2 vote. Sen. Bill Morrow, an Oceanside Republican, was not present for the vote but he opposes the bill as well.

The measure would have allowed doctors to prescribe lethal barbiturates for patients who are declared terminally ill and have less than six months to live. Patients would have had to undergo psychological examinations and waited two weeks after the request to take the drugs.

Dunn said he opposed the bill because he worried lawmakers would come back in future legislative sessions and expand assisted suicide by allowing patients who are not terminally ill to kill themselves as well.

"I could not resolve the risk that the power of money would ultimately define the parameters," said Dunn. "And so with heavy heart today, I will be a 'no' vote."

A coalition of groups including doctors organizations, disability activists, Hispanic organizations and pro-life groups banded together to oppose the measure.

Marilyn Golden, policy analyst with the Disability Rights, Education and Defense Fund, told the Los Angeles Times, "I'm just very, very glad that Sen. Dunn is not as naive as the proponents to think that assisted suicide could operate without corporate- and profit-related pressures from health insurers, from the rest of the healthcare industry, whether public or private."

Assemblyman Lloyd Levine, one of the lead sponsors of AB 651, said "We'll keep fighting," according to a Times report.

This is the second time legislation to legalize assisted suicide there has failed. Last year a measure to legalize the grisly practice received the backing of two Assembly committees but did not have enough votes in the full Assembly so it never came up for a vote.

Even if the state legislature signs off on the assisted suicide bill, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said in January he would veto it.

He thinks voters in the state should make the decision, not the state legislature.

"I personally think this is a decision probably that should go to the people, like the death penalty and other big issues," the governor said. "I don't think 120 legislators and I should make the decision. I think the people should make the decision, and whatever that is, that is what it ought to be."

Barbara Coombs Lee, executive director of the pro-euthanasia Compassion & Choices, lobbied for the measure but said her group would not try again to pass a measure. She also told the Times that a statewide initiative wouldn't be feasible.

A ballot measure would be "much too expensive, much too inflammatory," she said.

Thirteen years ago, California voters disapproved an assisted suicide ballot proposal. Voters rejected Proposition 161 by a 54% to 46% margin.

Nationally, an August 2005 Pew Research survey found only 44 percent of people "Favor making it legal for doctors to Assist in suicide." A May 2005 Gallup Poll found a close 49-42 percent split in favor of assisted suicide and a November 2004 CBS News survey determined that Americans were split 46-45 percent on the issue.

[Soldier4Christ]

Senate, Assembly Pass All-Crimes DNA Bill

A bill that will require all people convicted of certain crimes to provide a DNA sample was passed in both the New York State Senate and Assembly last week. Previously, only a fingerprint was required of a person convicted of a crime other than murder or rape.

New York State Senator John Flanagan (R-Smithtown) was the prime sponsor for the Senate bill, which passed on June 21. Assemblywoman Ginny Fields (D-Sayville) sponsored the bill that was passed by the Assembly on June 22. While the bill still needs to be signed by New York State Governor George Pataki, Flanagan said, “I have every expectation that he will sign it. I have heard nothing to the contrary.”

“This is one of the most important pieces of legislation for law enforcement,” said Suffolk County Sheriff Vincent DeMarco. “The two biggest things for me is legislation for parole violators and this.”

The Suffolk County Sheriff’s Office pointed out that the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services has done a study on the issue. According to findings, offenders who had committed crimes that warranted taking their DNA were, on average, found to have approximately 11 prior arrests and five prior convictions when their DNA was put through the database.

Before this law, only one in every seven people convicted of a crime needed to provide a DNA sample to police authorities, on average. “That means that most criminals, 84%, walk away from a criminal conviction without the need to submit a DNA sample,” DeMarco said.

While the Suffolk County Sheriff’s Office is in favor of the expansion of the DNA Database through this bill, some people have concerns. “This is clearly going to overload the forensic system in New York,” said Stephen Saloom, policy director of the Innocence Project. “By every indication, we’re having trouble in New York hiring and training qualified technicians even before the expansion.”

Set up in 1992, the Innocence Project is a non-profit legal clinic based in New York City, that handles cases where post-conviction DNA testing of evidence can yield conclusive proof of innocence. Saloom believes that many areas need to be addressed. “Lab capacity, prioritization of forensic analyses, backlogs created, probation and ability to process information,” Saloom said. “All of these unaddressed areas threaten the quality of forensic evidence in New York.”

The expansion of the DNA database will now include the crimes of menacing, reckless endangerment, petit larceny, stalking, criminal trespassing, possession of burglar’s tools, sexual abuse, forcible touching and endangering the welfare of children or disabled people. According to Flanagan, a total of 18 offenses were added. “If you look at convictions in the state of New York, petit larceny is number one,” Flanagan said, noting that he was proud to have that particular crime on the list.

Flanagan also said the state currently only collects DNA for 14% of all criminal convictions. That number will now increase to about 50% of all convictions. “That’s a very big and positive step forward,” said Flanagan. With these inclusions, the database will grow to approximately three times the size of its current collection.

The 2006-2007 budget approved by the New York State Legislature has already set aside $20 million to support additional capacity for DNA processing and expanded casework requirements. This money would not only provide for improvements and expansion of processing capabilities, but also would allow the “review and [investigation of] cases involving reasonable possibility of innocence of persons sentenced to imprisonment,” according to the bill’s summary.

“It’s a great bill,” said Flanagan. “It’s going to save lives. Equally important, it’s going to show that people are innocent.” Fields believes this will “not only [help] to find bad guys and put them away, but also to exit the good guys.” Fields added that she believes this bill will have a very positive impact. “I think it’s going to be hugely successful,” she commented. “This is going to help police and prosecutors.”

“The first thing they should be doing is making sure that hits turn into convictions,” said Saloom. A hit is when a match is made between a DNA profile taken from a forensic evidentiary sample and that of an offender’s DNA profile stored on the Convicted Offender Index of the state DNA Databank. According to a study conducted by the Department of Criminal Justice Services in January of 2002, only four of the first 104 DNA Database hits resulted in convictions.

“But that’s four more than would have been convicted,” Fields responded. “I stood up [in front of the Assembly] and said, ‘God forbid any of the women that work here leave and get raped. You would want to know who committed the crime and prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law.’” She maintained, “that’s four people brought to justice. Certainly you don’t want people like that to remain out there to commit more crimes.”

Fields also mentioned that “these crimes are generally committed over and over by the same people.” According to the sheriff’s office, however, “police authorities around the state have also had well over 2,000 conviction matches.”

Saloom insists that “there’s $20 million in the budget for this. We’ve already expanded [the DNA Database] twice. With that money, figure out why hits don’t turn into convictions. We need to recognize what the weak points are so, in the future, we can then turn more hits into convictions.”

The Innocence Project is also concerned about what they call “rogue databases.” Many times, according to Saloom, DNA is collected from victims to rule their DNA out at a crime scene. Saloom believes that police enforcement may use “innocent people’s DNA in ways that innocent people have not authorized and it may cause people to resist in future investigations.”

The Senate and the Assembly had differing views of what the bill should include. “One night I think we discussed this for hours,” Fields said. “The Senate wanted more DNA. The Assembly said wait, you’re going into people’s civil liberties at that point.” After much debate about the issue of DNA testing, it was finally settled that the accused must be convicted before DNA is collected. “My wish is that everybody would give DNA so that all crimes would be able to be solved,” Fields said.

“The best part of it was that both houses were able to come together,” Fields commented. Governor Pataki agreed. “We are pleased that both houses of the Legislature came to an agreement,” he stated.

“This is not a political issue, and it is not a philosophical debate,” DeMarco stated. “It is a law that is urgently needed in New York today.”

[Soldier4Christ]

Bill Could Bolster Trade With Vietnam as Counterweight to China

Since Congress permanently expanded trade with China six years ago, Chinese imports into the United States have more than doubled.

Now many members of Congress fear that the United States has grown too reliant on China. So they're looking to increase trade with Vietnam.

Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., introduced a bill this month to grant Vietnam permanent normal trade-relations status, which would allow its entry into the World Trade Organization and a reduction in tariffs. That could increase U.S. trade with Vietnam.

"I believe there is a national interest in not having all of our eggs in the China basket," Smith said.

Many trade expansion plans are stalled in Congress. Opponents point to a variety of problems with recent trade deals, including job losses in the United States, human rights violations and weak environmental standards abroad.

"A lot of the organizations that haven't liked the direction of our trade policy aren't happy with this trade proposal, given that you don't have workers' rights and environmental protections in effect there," said Larry Weiss, executive director of the Citizens Trade Campaign, a coalition whose members include unions, consumer groups and environmentalists.

But unlike other trade legislation, Smith's Vietnam bill has bipartisan support. He sponsored the legislation with Sen. Max Baucus, the ranking Democrat on the Finance Committee, which oversees trade. And Rep. Earl Blumenauer and Darlene Hooley, both Democrats from Oregon, co-sponsored a companion bill in the House.

"I think it's absolutely critical to help heal the wounds left over from Vietnam," said Blumenauer, who visited Vietnam in 2000 with then-President Clinton. "It is an opportunity to have a strategic counterweight against the Chinese. We're making extraordinary progress with the country of Vietnam."

The bill has a wide array of U.S. business supporters, ranging from manufacturers to farmers who see Vietnam as a new market for U.S. exports.

Currently, the United States must renew Vietnam's normal trade-relations status each year. In 2005, the United States reported $6.6 billion in imports from Vietnam, representing about one-third of 1 percent of all imports into the United States.

Smith's bill would make the trade status permanent.

"The reason we like it is it is just going to give us an incredible amount of certainty about our ability to do business in Vietnam," said Brad Figel, a Washington, D.C., lobbyist for Nike. About 25 percent of Nike's footwear is manufactured in Vietnam.

But such permanent status also could reduce U.S. influence over human rights abuses in Vietnam, said Thea Lee, policy director for the AFL-CIO.

"We'd be losing some flexibility with respect to the tools we can use," Lee said.

Smith sees his bill as an opportunity to improve conditions for the Vietnamese.

"Having them subject to international norms, WTO rules, doesn't lessen our leverage," said Smith, who led a congressional delegation to Vietnam last year. "It enhances it."

Unions also worry that the trade expansion could cause further job losses in the United States and increase the already large trade deficit -- the gap between the amount that the U.S. imports and exports.

The U.S. trade deficit with China rose from $83.8 billion in 2000 to $201.5 billion in 2005.

"If you look at the China debate, people said this has to be a good thing for the U.S.," Lee said.

Trade experts say Smith's bill would provide U.S. companies with an alternative source of goods. They note that costs in China have risen as trade has grown.

"As economic development rises throughout that region after 30 years of opening of the economy, the middle class is growing, wages are growing, and it is not the low-cost area that it once was," said Christopher Runckel, president of Runckel & Associates, a Portland, Ore., consulting firm that helps clients do business in Asia. "Vietnam is substantially less expensive for labor."

But the costs of shipping from Vietnam are much greater than from China, Runckel said.

Besides the cost considerations, Runckel said, relying mostly on one nation carries risks.

"Nobody wants to be dependent on only one supplier or one area, in case of a natural disaster, a hurricane, an earthquake, a political situation, or even in case of a trade dispute," he said.

[Soldier4Christ]

Class action suit filed v. Medicaid immigration law

Low-income citizens backed by antipoverty groups filed a proposed class action on Wednesday, challenging a federal law requiring proof of citizenship in exchange for benefits under the government's Medicaid health insurance program for the poor.

Critics say the law, set to go into effect July 1, will hurt the vulnerable who may be unable to provide original documents like birth certificates. Those most in jeopardy are those in nursing homes, with mental and physical disabilities, and the victims of natural disasters, they said.

The proposed class-action lawsuit, filed in Federal District Court in Chicago, argues the law unconstitutionally violates the Fifth Amendment's due-process guarantee by arbitrarily requiring documents and imposing deadlines.

"This law throws out a dragnet and says, all of you, all 50 million of you, have to come document your citizenship, whether we think you are a problem or not," said John Bouman, a lawyer at the Shriver Center on Poverty Law in Chicago, which filed the lawsuit on behalf of 9 people.

The suit names Michael Leavitt, secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, as defendant. A spokeswoman for the health agency was not available for comment.

"Medicaid coverage will be delayed or denied for many," according to a recent analysis by the nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation. "Obtaining required documents may be difficult and costly for low-income citizens," the report found.

Plaintiffs want the court to temporarily suspend the law while it considers the suit. They also contend the law puts an onerous burden on states, which must comply to keep federal funds.

About 50 million people receive health care benefits under the state-administered Medicaid program.

The consumer group Families USA called the law a political ploy as lawmakers debate potential measures to deal with the 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants believed to live in the United States.

"There is a political factor in all of this. We are in the middle of a very contentious debate on illegal immigration," Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA said.

He pointed to a recent analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, which found between 3 million and 5 million Medicaid recipients may not be able to produce the proper identification and could lose benefits.

One of the lawsuit's plaintiffs is 95 year-old Ruby Bell, who was born in 1911 in Arkansas and who has no birth certificate.

Bell now lives in a nursing home in Northern Illinois, but the county she came from did not start keeping certificates until 1914 and she may not be able prove citizenship under the law, Bouman said.

Medicaid recipients are now required to be U.S. citizens, but documentation is only required of those under suspicion.

[Soldier4Christ]

U.S. Supreme Court finds wetlands regulation all wet

Our constitutional way of life got a boost last week from the U.S. Supreme Court when the high court rejected the idea that federal officials have unlimited control over every pond, puddle and ditch in our country. In a scenario evocative of "Alice in Wonderland," Michigan landowner John Rapanos was convicted of "discharging a pollutant into navigable waters" without a permit under the Clean Water Act by placing clean sand on mostly dry land 20 miles away from the nearest navigable waterway.

When overzealous federal prosecutors sought more than a five-year jail term for Rapanos, the trial judge was outraged. He refused to send Rapanos to prison for "moving sand from one end of his property to another," calling that "our system gone crazy."

Nevertheless, Rapanos paid a $185,000 fine and served three years probation. For similar conduct, Rapanos was required to provide $3 million in mitigation and was potentially liable for an additional $10 million in fines. Based on his belief -- that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which claims to have authority to regulate any wetlands with a connection to navigable waters, had no jurisdiction over his property -- Rapanos exercised his civil right to be free from illegal and heavy-handed government regulation and appealed his case to the U.S. Supreme Court. Last week, the Supreme Court reversed the lower courts' decisions, as a majority of the justices said a remote connection between wetlands and truly navigable waterways is not enough for federal regulation to apply.

Chief Justice John Roberts called the decision another defeat for the corps and its "essentially boundless view of the scope of its power."

While the Clean Water Act specifically authorizes the corps to issue permits for the "discharge of dredged or fill material into the navigable waters" of the United States, the corps took its authority much further.

For more than 200 years, the term "navigable waters" has meant channels used by boats for interstate commerce. But the corps claimed that when Congress said "navigable waters" it really meant all waters in the United States.

The result of this nonsensical interpretation, which four justices said went "beyond parody," was to expand federal jurisdiction over any area over which water flows, including "storm drains, roadside ditches, [and] ripples of sand in the desert that may contain water once a year." The corps boasts that it processes 90,000 permit applications a year. But the cost of these permits is enormous. One recent study, cited by Justice Antonin Scalia, reported that even small fill projects take an average of 313 days to process and cost $28,915, whereas a larger project requires an average 788 days and a cost of $271,596. It is no wonder that Rapanos refused to comply. While last week's divided court ruling leaves questions for lower courts to answer on a case-by-case basis, the court was unwilling to accept the corps' expansive implementation of the Clean Water Act.

The majority wrote that lower courts needed to look again at Rapanos' case, saying the connection to navigable waters from Rapanos' property may not fit the requirements of the Clean Water Act.

Although the justices split three ways on what would fit the requirements of the Clean Water Act, the court was united in its view that government officials, the public and the courts would all benefit from clearer regulatory definitions. Americans deserve clear, consistent rules that are in line with the language of the act and satisfy the court's concerns for overreaching. As the high court noted, the corps hasn't provided that guidance.

Going forward, the corps should focus its enforcement efforts on rivers, lakes, and streams and integrated wetlands and not look far and wide -- 20 miles in Rapanos' case -- to regulate drainage ditches that are rarely wet and have an insubstantial connection to any navigable waterway. As both the court and Congress have recognized, it is the primary responsibility of the states to address local pollution and manage local land and water use.

[Soldier4Christ]

Sen. Bill Frist revives stem cell bill

WASHINGTON - Urged anew by Nancy Reagan, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist on Thursday revived a bill to expand funding for embryonic stem cell research after conservatives who had blocked it withdrew their objections.

"It's my intention now that we've gotten over this first hurdle that we will (vote on the bill) in the not too distant future," Frist said as he brought the three-bill package to the floor.

"We'll do this before we get out of here for the October break?" asked Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada.

"We will," replied Frist, R-Tenn.

The announcement marked a major advance for a bill — one supported by about 70 percent of Americans — that had been stalled in the Senate since the House passed it in May 2005. Frist was still untangling objections from at least two senators that blocked the bill up to a few moments before he brought the package to the floor, according to officials close to the talks who requested anonymity because they had not been authorized to speak publicly.

The bill is expected to pass. But for all the progress, President Bush's veto threat remained, said White House spokesman Ken Lisaius.

The bill would permit the government to pay for human embryonic stem cell research, a science that carries promise in the hunt for cures to diseases that afflict millions of people.

Social conservatives liken the research to abortion because the process of extracting stem cells from a days-old embryo results in its death. Bush, who believes the practice is immoral, has threatened to veto the legislation.

Two officials close to the developments said Reagan, the former first lady whose behind-the-scenes advocacy helped the bill win House passage, spoke with Frist last week and urged him to advance it.

Her husband, former President Ronald Reagan, died in 2004 after suffering from
Alzheimer's disease for more than a decade. Some scientists say stem cell research could help relieve the effects of Alzheimer's or possibly lead to a cure.

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., has for months intended to block the bills Frist brought forward, but talks with Frist on Thursday persuaded him to lift his objection for now, several Republican and Democratic officials said.

Even as Frist prepared to bring the package to the floor, an objection from at least one senator threatened to block it, the officials said. They would not identify the senator.

A heart transplant surgeon, Frist stunned many in his party last year by announcing his support for the bill and promising a vote on it before the 109th Congress expires at the end of this year.

[Soldier4Christ]

Supreme Court upholds Arizona insanity law

The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Arizona's law on the insanity defense is not too restrictive in limiting evidence defendants can present at trial.

By a 6-3 vote, justices affirmed the murder conviction of Eric Clark, who thought he was being pursued by space aliens when he killed an Arizona police officer. Clark, a paranoid schizophrenic who was a teenager at the time, is serving 25 years to life in prison.

Under Arizona's law, defendants "may be found guilty except insane" if they prove they were so mentally ill that they did not know what they did was wrong. Many other states also allow insanity findings for defendants who can show they did not understand the nature of their criminal acts.

Critics had said that Arizona's standard for proving insanity is almost impossible to meet, violating the constitutional rights of mentally ill defendants.

Writing for the majority, Justice David Souter disagreed.

"Arizona's rule serves to preserve the state's chosen standard for recognizing insanity as a defense and to avoid confusion and misunderstanding on the part of jurors," he wrote.

Souter said the state can limit psychiatric testimony to avoid such confusion, given the often dueling opinions of experts and inability of anyone to truly know what is in someone else's mind.

But Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said in a dissent that restricting expert testimony deprived jurors of evidence they needed to "make sense" of Clark's claims of mental illness.

"In sum, the rule forces the jury to decide guilt in a fictional world with undefined and unexplained behaviors," Kennedy wrote on behalf of himself and justices John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

It was the first time the court has dealt with a direct constitutional challenge to insanity defense laws since lawmakers nationwide imposed new restrictions following John Hinckley's acquittal by reason of insanity in the March 1981 shooting of President Reagan.

Four states do not allow for insanity defenses at all: Idaho, Kansas, Montana and Utah.

Clark had a trial before a judge in which he was found guilty of first-degree murder. Part of Clark's appeal turned on whether the judge should have considered mental illness in weighing whether Clark intentionally killed the officer.

Before Clark started acting bizarrely the year before the killing, he was a standout football player and popular student. He began obsessing about the millennium, and ran up his parents' credit cards buying survival supplies. He became convinced that aliens had taken over his town and that his own parents were aliens.

Clark shot Officer Jeff Moritz in Flagstaff on June 21, 2000. Moritz, a 30-year-old father of a toddler, had pulled Clark over as the 17-year-old drove around his neighborhood in a truck playing loud rap music at about 5 a.m.

The case is Clark v. Arizona, 05-5966.

[Soldier4Christ]

Military claims gains on Iraqi terrorists

The U.S. military claimed an advantage in the fight against al-Qaida in Iraq on Thursday, saying raids since the death of its leader have forced many of its foreign fighters out into the open to be captured or killed.

Iraq's bloodshed continued. At least 46 deaths from violence were reported across the country, including nine bullet-riddled bodies pulled from rivers — apparent victims of sectarian death squads.

Maj. Gen. William Caldwell, spokesman for U.S. forces in Iraqi, acknowledged Iraqi civilians were suffering most from the insurgency, accounting for 70 percent of all deaths and injuries, while he said the number of U.S. casualties did not appear to be on the rise.

But he said the Americans gained momentum in its fight against al-Qaida in Iraq after killing Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, and have devoted a lot of resources to targeting his successor as leader, Abu Ayyub al-Masri.

"There is no question, if we can take him down, that will just disrupt the organization ... to the point where it would be ineffective for a long period of time," Caldwell said. "It is very disorganized right now. And it is very disrupted right now."

He said coalition and Iraqi security forces had captured or killed 57 foreign fighters this month.

"The reason we were able to pick up and track some of these mid-level people ... in the last few weeks is because they've been forced to conduct meetings, to get out and be more visible, because their system has been so disrupted," he said. "And that has given us the opportunities to find them, track them and go get them."

On Wednesday, Iraqi authorities said they had captured an al-Qaida suspect from Tunisia who allegedly bombed a Shiite shrine earlier this year, setting off a spasm of violence between Sunnis and Shiites.

Caldwell said Yousri Fakher Mohammed Ali, also known as Abu Qudama, was captured May 20 after he was seriously wounded in a clash with security forces north of Baghdad. Haitham Sabah Shaker Mohammed al-Badri, the alleged Iraqi mastermind of the Feb. 22 attack on the shrine in Samarra, remains at large.

While cracking down on terror groups, the Iraqi government has offered an olive branch to the Sunni-dominated insurgency, with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki announcing a national reconciliation plan and reaching out to militants with an amnesty proposal.

The amnesty would not absolve those who have killed Iraqis or American coalition troops. But proving which individuals have carried out fatal attacks would be a difficult task in many cases. The issue is extremely sensitive in the United States, which has lost more than 2,500 uniformed men and women in Iraq, many to insurgent bombs and ambushes.

Insurgent and government officials told The Associated Press on Wednesday that 11 Sunni militant groups had offered an immediate halt to all attacks — including those on American troops — if the United States agreed to withdraw foreign forces from Iraq in two years.

On Thursday, Iraqi presidential security adviser Wafiq al-Samaraie said he received an e-mail Wednesday with an offer of cooperation from a person describing himself as a member of "one of the most dangerous violent groups abroad."

"We answered him immediately by e-mail and welcomed him, and he replied to us that there are ammunition piles at point X, go and find it, and there is a criminal in such a place ... so this is a blessing of the reconciliation initiative," al-Samaraie told state-run al-Iraqiya TV.

He did not discuss whether the information was accurate.

Shooting and bombings Thursday killed 12 people in Baghdad, including a Shiite trash collector, a university security chief, a baker, two merchants and an electrical worker.

In the northern city of Kirkuk, a suicide car bomber struck the funeral of a Shiite soldier in the northern city of Kirkuk, killing four people and wounding 27, police and hospital officials said.

Police in Kirkuk also found the body of a 15-year-old girl who had been kidnapped five days ago in the oil-rich city.

Seven bullet-riddled bodies were found floating in the Tigris River in Suwayrah, 25 miles south of Baghdad, while two men who had been shot to death and showed signs of torture were found in the Euphrates River in Musayyib, 40 miles south of the capital.

Highlighting the government's efforts to rein in the violence and take over control of its own security from U.S. forces, Interior Minister Jawad al-Bolani led a celebration at the police academy in Baghdad to swear in 560 newly graduated recruits.

He said al-Maliki's reconciliation plan "is evidence of the government's intention to restore stability and promote reconstruction."

[Soldier4Christ]

'Grandma' debate in governor's race rages on


Her attorney Wednesday argued independent gubernatorial candidate Carole Keeton Strayhorn is known to friends and strangers as “Grandma.''

The state comptroller -- who was elected as a Republican -- wants her name listed with “Grandma'' on the November ballot.

Attorney Roy Minton wrote to Secretary of State Roger Williams to say the nickname "Grandma'' is not a slogan. But the secretary of state's office later issued a statement saying it doesn't appear Strayhorn can provide substantive evidence showing "Grandma'' is not a slogan.

Williams, who was traveling to attend a White House state dinner, will make a final decision when he returns.

Also, Williams informed independent Kinky Friedman that “Kinky'' appears to be a nickname and will be allowed on the ballot -- after his given first name, "Richard.''

Both are challenging GOP Gov. Rick Perry. The Democratic nominee is Chris Bell.

[Soldier4Christ]

House approves drilling 50 miles off Maine coast

Drilling for oil and natural gas would be allowed 50 miles off Maine's coast for the first time in nearly a quarter century under legislation approved in the House on Thursday.

The bill's prospects remain uncertain, however, because of a threatened filibuster in the Senate. Also, the House measure would give states power to push their boundaries out to 100 miles or authorize drilling less than 50 miles from shore. Drilling has been prohibited within 200 miles of the shore under annual provisions in spending bills.

The ban on what is called the Outer Continental Shelf began off the coast of California in 1982 and included New England two years later. But the House voted 232-187 on Thursday to allow drilling, which is expected to occur primarily in the Gulf of Mexico. Reps. Tom Allen and Mike Michaud, both D-Maine, voted against the bill, citing concerns that accidents could hurt tourism and commercial fishing.

"The heart of the this bill is to drive states to allow drilling offshore," Allen said. "We don't need to do that, at least at this stage."

Michaud criticized the Republican president and congressional leadership for failing to reduce consumption of fossil fuels rather than propose more drilling.

"The congressional leadership has once again threatened Maine's tourist and fishing industries with an ill-advised plan for coastal drilling," he said.

Conservationists and other critics of coastal drilling fear that mishaps could spoil commercial fishing and tourism and affect public health in Maine. Advocacy groups opposed to the legislation include the League of Conservation Voters, Natural Resources Defense Council and the Sierra Club.

Despite House approval, Florida's two senators -- Democrat Bill Nelson and Republican Mel Martinez -- vowed to filibuster the legislation. Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, both R-Maine, also oppose lifting the drilling ban.

The House bill would allow drilling from 50 to 200 miles off shore, though states could set the limit at 100 miles -- or under 50 -- by voting to do so every five years. Muddying the debate is the fact that former presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton each signed executive orders similar to the existing 200-mile moratorium. The order is set to expire in 2011, though President Bush could abolish it at any time without a congressional vote.

Waters covered by the ban hold 19 billion of the 86 billion barrels of oil thought to lie beneath the Outer Continental Shelf, and 86 trillion of the 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, according to the Interior Department's Minerals Management Service. Rep. Richard Pombo, R-Calif., who drafted the bill as chairman of the Resources Committee, said oil and gas deposits can be developed while protecting the environment.

"It's time to stop saying no," Pombo said.

He broadened the appeal for the legislation by changing the way revenue from federal oil and gas royalties would be shared with states. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said the bill would funnel $20.6 billion to states from now until 2017, with all but $1.7 billion of that money going to four states that already have drilling: Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama. "This bill will spur an immediate debate on the state level regarding the safety, feasibility, and necessity of offshore energy production," said Rep. John E. Peterson, R-Pa. But California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican in Pombo's home state, opposed the legislation. Officials from other states with beaches, including New Jersey and Delaware, opposed the legislation as a threat to their multibillion-dollar tourism industries "How do we opt out when New York or Virginia has a spill and it comes to our shores?" said Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J. "It would devastate our tourism." About 3 million gallons of oil spilled from offshore oil and gas wells in 73 incidents from 1980 to 1999, according to a federal Minerals Management Service report. Major oil spills occurred decades ago from offshore rigs in the Gulf of Mexico and along the California coast. Although drilling isn't expected immediately in Maine waters, the concern among lawmakers and conservationists is that a spill would taint local fisheries. An oil spill within the Gulf Stream off the East Coast could move up to 140 miles in 24 hours, the Sierra Club warned, based on a University of Miami study. "Oil and gas drilling threatens to destroy a way of life in Maine's coastal communities," said Matthew Davis, a spokesman for Environment Maine.

[Soldier4Christ]

Former Alabama Governor Convicted

Former Gov. Don Siegelman and former Health South CEO Richard Scrushy were convicted Thursday in a bribery scheme that derailed Siegelman's campaign to retake his former office.

Siegelman, 60, was accused of trading government favors for campaign donations when he was governor from 1999 to 2003 and lieutenant governor from 1995 to 1999.

Scrushy was accused of arranging $500,000 in donations to Siegelman's campaign for a state lottery in exchange for a seat on a state hospital regulatory board.

The case was tried as Siegelman sought the Democratic nomination for governor, and the trial put him in court during the final weeks of the campaign. He lost to Lt. Gov. Lucy Baxley in the June 6 primary and blamed the charges for his defeat.

[Soldier4Christ]

Administration notifies Congress of five billion-dollar arms deal

WASHINGTON The Bush administration has quietly notified Congress that it's approved the sale of 18 new F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan.
The planes are part of a five (b) billion-dollar weapons deal.

The package includes an option to purchase another 18 F-16 fighter jets, an offer to modernize 26 used aircraft already in Pakistan's arsenal, as well as logistical and other support.

It coincides with an administration drive in Congress for endorsement of nuclear cooperation with India, a historic rival of Pakistan. But a State Department spokeswoman says the action is unrelated.

Pakistan has been trying for years to purchase new F-16 jets. Its support for the U-S in countering terrorism apparently bolstered its case.

Congress has 30 days to accept or reject the sale.

[Soldier4Christ]

Another Arab State Edges Towards Full Democracy


Women in Kuwait voted and ran for office for the first time on Thursday, a development seen as pushing the Middle East another step closer to full participatory democracy.

Kuwaiti men and women voted for some 250 candidates -- including 28 women -- to fill 50 seats in the small Gulf state's 65-seat National Assembly (the remaining 15 are appointed by the country's emir.)

Full gender equality remains a way off, however: Women were forced to use separate polling stations, due to demands by Islamists who oppose women voting.

Results available by early Friday also showed that the women candidates appeared to be faring badly, despite the fact women comprise 57 percent of the electorate.

On the eve of the election, a non-governmental organization called the Women Cultural Social Society conducted a survey showing that although for most respondents a candidate's political platform was more important than gender, many would vote according to gender -- and most voters of both sexes would support men.

In the poll, about 44 percent of female respondents said they'd vote for candidate based on platform, not gender. But another 40 percent of women said they would vote for a man, compared to just around 15 percent who said they'd vote for a woman.

Kuwait's Arab Times daily quoted one woman candidate, Khalida Al-Kheder, as decrying the conduct of "conservative tribal women" whom she said had been bussed in in large numbers to vocally support male candidates.

Some analysts argued that female candidates had not had sufficient time to lay the groundwork for their campaigns.

Women were given the vote in May 2005, they did not expect to be able to use it for the first time until scheduled elections in 2007. But last month, Kuwaiti emir Sheikh Sabah Al Ahmad Al Sabah dissolved parliament and called an early election following a dispute between the government and opposition over electoral reforms.

Despite the historic suffrage decision, the campaign was dominated not by that but by calls for political reform and an end to official corruption.

Nonetheless, Women Cultural Social Society president Shaikha Al Nusf viewed the campaign positively on both counts.

"Clearly, women have come a long way in a short time," she said in a statement released through the NGO's U.S. partner, Freedom House.

"In the one month since the emir called for elections, women candidates and voters have made this election about issues rather than traditional affiliations."

Speaking during a visit to a polling station, Prime Minister Sheikh Nasser al-Mohammad al-Sabah said "the participation of women has added a new spirit to the march of democracy in Kuwait." Turnout was around 66 percent.

Suffrage for women in Kuwait leaves Saudi Arabia as the only country in the world that holds elections but does not allow women to vote. Women in Lebanon may only vote if they hold a stipulated educational qualification, not required for men.

(The United Arab Emirates and Brunei do not hold elections at all, and a number of countries that do fail to meet standards for free and fair democratic elections.)

State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said the U.S. congratulated Kuwait on the election, where participation by male and female voters was robust.

"The turnout demonstrates the universal value of democracy across cultures and
regions."

Mideast political commentator and Iranian author Amir Taheri says that despite Kuwait's small size, its election is important because of the effect it will have on politics in the broader Arab world.

"The exercise will help consolidate the idea of holding elections as a means of securing access to power, something new and still fragile in most Arab states," he said in a recent column.

Taheri also saw the Iraq situation as having played an important role in what he called the region's new interest in holding elections.

Arab elites saw how quickly Saddam Hussein's regime, the region's most powerful, had toppled, and observed that "an Arab regime without some mandate from the people is never more than a house of cards."

Arabs had also watched as millions of Iraqis lined up to vote, repeatedly, all within a couple of years, he said.

[Soldier4Christ]

House OKs bill lifting offshore drilling ban

The House voted today to end a quarter-century offshore drilling ban and allow energy companies to tap natural gas and oil beneath waters from New England to Alaska.

Opponents of the federal ban argued that the nation needed to move closer to energy independence and insisted the gas and oil could be taken without threatening the environment and coastal beaches. They said a state choosing to keep the moratorium could do so.

The measure was approved 232-187.

But the bill's prospects in the Senate were uncertain. Florida's two senators have vowed to filibuster any legislation that would allow drilling within 125 miles of Florida's coast. Other senators from several coastal states also have strongly opposed ending the drilling restrictions.

Many lawmakers fear that energy development could despoil coastal beaches, should there be a spill, and threatens the multibillion-dollar recreation and tourist economies of states where offshore energy development has been barred since the early 1980s.

An attempt by a group of Florida lawmakers to allow states to maintain a protective zone of 125 miles was rejected.

``Our beaches and our coastline is what is critical to Floridians,'' declared Rep. Jim Davis, D-Fla. ``We should not be sacrificing our economy, our environment for a little oil and gas.''

Rep. Richard Pombo, R-Calif., a leading proponent for lifting the moratorium argued that drilling still would be prohibited within 50 miles of shore and states could extend the ban up to 100 miles.

He ridiculed the bill's critics as ``opposing everything'' when it comes to increasing domestic energy production. ``You can't say no on everything,'' Pombo proclaimed.

But Lois Capps, D-Calif., said states would have to overcome numerous hurdles to continue the drilling restrictions, including having state legislatures and the government seek such protection every five years.

The bill also would revamp how the federal government shares oil and gas royalties with states, producing a windfall for four Gulf states - Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi and Alabama - that currently have oil and gas rigs off their shores.

The eastern and western Gulf of Mexico produces virtually all of the country's offshore oil and gas, with waters off the eastern Gulf, both the Atlantic and Pacific coasts and much of Alaska under the drilling moratorium.

Under the bill, states' share of royalties would increase to 50 percent over 10 years and eventually could rise as high as 75 percent. States currently get less than 5 percent of royalties from offshore oil and gas leases in the central and western Gulf.

The Interior Department estimated that revenue sharing changes could cost the federal government as much as $69 billion in lost royalties over 15 years and ``several hundred billion dollars'' over 60 years.

The White House issued a statement saying it favors much of the bill, but strongly opposes the changes in royalty revenue sharing which it said ``would have a long-term impact on the federal deficit.''

The Interior Department estimates there are about 19 billion barrels of recoverable oil and 86 trillion cubic feet of natural gas beneath waters currently under drilling bans from New England to southern Alaska.

But supporters of the drilling moratorium argue there's four times that amount of oil and gas available in offshore waters open to energy companies, mainly in the central and western Gulf of Mexico and off parts of Alaska.

The country uses about 21 million barrels of oil a day.

``We should not be opening all of our coasts to oil drilling when we have not taken the first step to conserve oil,'' said Rep. Sherwood Boehlert, R-N.Y., who wanted to put into the bill a requirement to increase automobile fuel economy, but was prevented from doing so.

But Rep. John Peterson, R-Pa., argued that developing more U.S. energy resources - especially more natural gas - is needed to ease supply shortages that have seen natural gas prices soar and America rely increasingly on oil imports.

``This is not about oil companies,'' insisted Peterson. ``This is about America competing. ... We're the only society that has said we're going to lock up our resources.''

[Soldier4Christ]

Senate committee approves $3.9 million for U of L projects

 The U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee has approved $3.9 million in funding for the University of Louisville.

The funding comprises:

    *   $1.5 million to research lung diseases for the U of L Lung Biology/Translational Lung Disease program.
    * $1 million to establish a Computational Biomarker Discovery Center at U of L. The center will focus on developing clinical tools that predict the risk or early diagnosis of cancer, diabetic complications and children's diseases.
    * $400,000 for the U of L Sustainable Buildings Project, a collaborative effort between the university, Jefferson County Public Schools and Louisville-Jefferson County Metro Government to prepare plans to incorporate energy, water and waste efficiency technologies into public infrastructure.
    * $1 million for the Kentucky Rural Energy Consortium. U of L will administer the funds for the consortium, which includes the University of Kentucky. The consortium will develop and deploy renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies related to agriculture and rural communities.

The funding now must be approved by the full Senate.