Other Political News

[Soldier4Christ]

U.S. Senate to consider $11.7 bln waterways bill

The U.S. Senate is set to vote this week on an $11.7 billion waterways bill that would fund construction of new mammoth locks on the Mississippi and Illinois rivers to speed barge traffic for grain, petroleum, cement and other bulk materials.

Aides to key sponsors of the legislation said an agreement had been reached to limit amendments to keep debate on the bill from eating up too much time as the Senate races to finish business before an August recess.

The Senate is scheduled to take up the Water Resources Development Act on Tuesday after it finishes debate on stem-cell research.

The omnibus bill would authorize hundreds of Army Corps of Engineers projects, including restoration work on the Florida Everglades and the hurricane-devastated Louisiana coastline.

Among the more controversial provisions are $1.8 billion for seven new, 1,200-foot-long locks on the upper Mississippi and lower Illinois rivers, along with $1.6 billion in environmental restoration associated with these projects. It would be the largest U.S. inland waterway project ever.

Backers say the existing 600-foot-locks are outmoded and cause river traffic jams, while the new and larger locks will encourage more exports and reduce the cost of shipping grain, petroleum, chemicals, cement and other bulk goods.

The National Corn Growers Association says more than 1 billion bushels of grain, or 60 percent of U.S. grain exports, are floated on the Mississippi River to export terminals each year.

Environmentalists and fiscal hawks say there is not enough barge traffic to justify the new locks and question their impact on the river ecosystem.

Some 80 U.S. senators have signed a letter supporting the bill. Last year, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a similar waterways bill by a vote of 406-14.

 An aide to Illinois Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist had scheduled 13 hours of floor debate time for the bill and nine amendments, with a vote likely on Wednesday or Thursday.

The most controversial of these is a proposal by Arizona Sen. John McCain and Wisconsin Sen. Russ Feingold to reform oversight of the Army Corps of Engineers in the wake of levee breaks that flooded New Orleans last year.

The amendment would require an independent review for projects costing more than $40 million and would require a cabinet-level committee to determine the highest priorities among the corps' $58 billion backlog of construction projects.

[Soldier4Christ]

Competing House and Senate Bills to Reform Process of Foreign Acquisitions of US Defense Firms Leave Much to Be Desired -- Yet Multinational Lobbyists Seek to Weaken Them


 A June 14 letter from the Business Roundtable, The Financial Services Forum, the Organization for International Investment and the Chamber of Commerce commended the House Financial Services Committee for voting favorably on the “National Security Foreign Investment Reform and Strengthened Transparency Act of 2006”( H.R. 5337).  This bill reforms the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States.  CFIUS has come under fire in both houses of Congress for failing to exercise its mandate to investigate – and if need be, block –  foreign acquisitions or mergers with American firms that have adverse national security implications. 

One might wonder why four groups that are dominated by transnational corporate and financial interests, and that have no credible record of concern for national security, would endorse legislation that gives national security priority over business transactions.  The answer is that the House bill, sponsored by Rep. Roy Blunt (R-MO), is weaker than the “Foreign Investment and National Security Act”  marked up by the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee on March 30.  In a time of war and international rivalry, most business leaders realize that they cannot oppose security measures openly or directly, but they can work behind the scenes to undermine security efforts they deem to interfere with their private commercial agendas.  That is why they spend millions on lobbyists.

It should be remembered that on September 27, 2005, the Business Roundtable – along with the Chamber of Commerce, the Organization for International Investment, the American Petroleum Institute, Coalition for Employment Through Exports, Coalition of Services Industries, Emergency Committee for American Trade, National Association of Manufacturers, National Foreign Trade Council, Securities Industry Association, and the Council for International Business – sent a letter to the Senate Banking Committee claiming that no changes at all were needed in current CFIUS procedures! A broken and ineffective system was fine with them.  When it became clear that this line of argument wasn’t going to fly, the lobbyists shifted their tone, but not their objective.

In testimony before the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade and Technology in May, Business Roundtable lobbyist John Veroneau objected to the new role given to the National Intelligence Director in the CFIUS process, claiming that the 30 days given the DNI to review transactions “could unnecessarily prolong CFIUS cases.” Veroneau wanted “flexibility” to speed up deals, even when foreign governments were involved.  Such an attitude clearly indicates the low priority some corporate executives give to security matters: They’re just not worth the time to consider! As Veroneau put it, “No president should ever hesitate to block an acquisition that truly threatens national security.  But, it is important that the process by which such risks are considered does not hamper legitimate foreign investment.” The key definition is what constitutes “legitimate” foreign investment, from the perspective of the government as opposed to that of business.

The House bill does have some good provisions that would improve CFIUS performance.  As mentioned, it does add a role for the DNI, but without making him a formal member of CFIUS as the Senate bill does.  In the House version, the DNI would have to insert himself into the process if something caught his attention.  This is not because Rep. Blunt is trying to trim the size of CFIUS to something more manageable.  H.R. 5337 lists 12 members plus “any other designee of the President from the Executive Office of the President.” The House list is the present composition: the Secretaries of the Treasury, Homeland Security, Commerce, Defense, and State; the Attorney General; the Directors of the Office of Management and Budget, the National Economic Council, the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors, the U.S. Trade Representative; and the President's Assistant for National Security Affairs. 

The Senate calls for a smaller standing committee, dropping the last five posts from the House list above and adding the DNI.  However, the President is still free to add members from his executive office “on a case-by-case” basis.  When CFIUS was created in 1975, it had only four members: Defense, State, Commerce and Treasury.  With so many diverse constituencies now  represented, CFIUS has lost its focus.

Both the House and Senate bills leave the Secretary of the Treasury as the chair of CFIUS.  This is a major problem because Treasury’s main concern is to maintain stability in financial markets, not worry about national security.  It thus favors any deal that recycles the U.S.   trade deficit back into the American economy.  A 2005 GAO report requested by the Senate Banking Committee found that the effectiveness of the current process “in protecting U.S.  national security may be limited because Treasury – as Chair of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States – has narrowly defined what constitutes a threat to national security.”  The business community has, naturally, favored keeping Treasury in control. 

Both bills try to weaken Treasury’s dominance by naming a Vice Chairman, who must sign off on decisions.  The House picked Homeland Security while the Senate picked the Defense Department.  Again, the Senate choice is stronger and more logical.  While the public outrage over the Dubia Ports deal centered on the risk of terrorist infiltration of a foreign terminal operator, the scope of CFIUS is much larger than the physical protection of American assets from violent assault.  CFIUS was established under the Defense Production Act of 1950.  The purpose of the DPA is to maintain a robust domestic industrial base under American control, one that can provide the nation with all the means to wage modern war.  This mission falls under the authority of the Pentagon. 

The Senate bill embodies this original intent of CFIUS by listing the following as factors to be considered when taking action:
– Potential effects on United States critical infrastructure, including major energy assets;
– Potential effects on United States critical technologies; 
– Domestic production needed for projected national defense requirements;
– The capability and capacity of domestic industries to meet national defense requirements, including the availability of human resources, products, technology, materials, and other supplies and services;
– The control of domestic industries and commercial activity by foreign citizens as it affects the capability and capacity of the United States to meet the requirements of national security; and
– The potential effects of the proposed or pending transaction on sales of military goods, equipment, or technology to any country.

There is no equivalent listing in the House bill, though “covered transactions” do include those involving critical infrastructure or foreign government-controlled entities.  Both bills call for improved monitoring of any agreements or conditions placed on transactions to mitigate their effect on national security, to insure that threats do not reappear.

cont'd

[Soldier4Christ]

Another key provision that the Senate bill has, and that the House bill lacks, concerns discriminating between foreign countries as to how safe or dangerous it may be to deal with their governments or enterprises.  Key to such ranking is whether a foreign country is trying to acquire weapons or military technology in violation of non-proliferation agreements; how well that country has cooperated with the United States against terrorism; and whether there is a potential for the transshipment or diversion of technology to third parties.  The DNI, with the secretaries of State, Commerce and Energy, and with the chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, is to join the Treasury and Pentagon in drawing up these rankings.

In a March 29, 2006 letter to the Senate Banking Committee, the Business Roundtable,
Financial Service Roundtable, Organization for International Investment, Securities Industry Association and Chamber of Commerce supported an amendment that would drop the ranking procedure.  It has long been the position of these groups that as long as the checks clear, anybody’s money is good, regardless of their international behavior or the nature of their regime.  Another clear sign that national security is an alien concept in their business calculations – which is why their pronouncements on policy cannot be trusted.

What is needed is more Congressional oversight of the process, and both bills provide it.  In this case, the House bill is the stronger measure.  H.R. 5337 requires a report to both Houses of Congress twice a year, before January 31 and July 31, on what CFIUS has been doing.  The most important element of this report is a required “evaluation of whether there is credible evidence of a coordinated strategy by one or more countries or companies to acquire United States companies involved in research, development, or production of critical technologies for which the United States is a leading producer” and “an evaluation of whether there are industrial espionage activities directed or directly assisted by foreign governments against private United States companies aimed at obtaining commercial secrets related to critical technologies.” This is an important step beyond the current CFIUS “case-by-case” approach, which has rendered it  blind to the larger strategies foreign governments and corporate groups are pursuing.

The Senate bill (which still had not been formally submitted and assigned a number) calls for an annual report from CFIUS, which is to have “a table showing on a cumulative basis, by sector, product, and country of foreign ownership, the number of acquisitions reviewed, investigated, or both, by CFIUS to provide a census of production potentially relevant to the Nation’s defense industrial base owned or controlled by foreign persons or foreign governments.”

The transnational business groups oppose Congressional oversight.  In a letter sent to the Senate Banking Committee the day of the markup, it was charged by the Business Roundtable and its allies that “among the significant issues yet to be resolved are: the unprecedented notification and reporting requirements, which increase the risk of transactions becoming political.” By political, they mean the intrusion of government policy concerns into business decisions.  These business groups consider themselves “non-political” in that they care only about themselves and dismiss any larger consequences of their actions to the nation as unimportant.  Chairman Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) easily rebutted the lobbyists, saying on the day of the markup, “As critical as foreign investment is, however, our national security is paramount.  Once bargained away, it may never be recovered.  Thus, we can not take the chance and allow it to be sold in the first place.”

Neither bill has yet made it to the floor of its respective chamber.  When each does, the lobbyists will use their pet legislators to offer weakening amendments.  And when the bills are adopted in their separate houses, they will have to go into a Senate-House conference to have their differences reconciled into a final law – and again the lobbyists will be at work to convince the conferrees to adopt the weaker language.  Though this long process, those who place national security and robust domestic industrial capabilities at the apex of policy must work just as hard to insure that the strongest measures are adopted to protect America’s future.

[Soldier4Christ]

Neutrality "Hits" Slam Senate Science Leader


Net neutrality opponents are taking no prisoners when it comes to fighting their political opponents.

Tech-savvy players on both sides are using the Web to spread their views on the issue, but neutrality supporters seem to be having the most fun this week. at a U.S. Senator's expense.

Sen. Ted Stevens, a Republican from Alaska, explained the Internet and e-mail while justifying his vote against a net neutrality provision in an overhaul of the federal telecommunications laws. Stevens, the chair of the U.S. Senate Committee on Science, Commerce and Transportation, is now being quoted and heard around the globe.

His description of the Internet as a "series of tubes," and "not a big truck" or "something you can just dump something on," was featured on The Daily Show, which showed his face, followed by an image of a hillbilly. There is techno song, and other "hits" are spreading wildly among neutrality supporters and comedy-seekers. Wikipedia posted portions of the speech under Stevens' entry.

[Soldier4Christ]

Northwest may end pensions if Congress doesn't act

Bankrupt Northwest Airlines Corp.(NWACQ.PK: Quote, Profile, Research) would consider terminating pension plans if Congress did not act on pension reform legislation within weeks, its chief executive said on Tuesday.

"Congress has to act now," Douglas Steenland told reporters after a meeting with employees on Capitol Hill.

Northwest and Delta Air Lines Inc. (DALRQ.PK: Quote, Profile, Research), also bankrupt, are mounting a lobbying blitz this week to press lawmakers on pending legislation that would overhaul corporate pension funding rules and give airlines substantially more time to fund their deficit-ridden plans.

A special committee of lawmakers from the House of Representatives and Senate have struggled over the past four months to negotiate a final bill. There is no schedule for completing talks, but key lawmakers have expressed some optimism in recent days that a deal could be close.

"We've done everything we can possibly do to fix the company," Steenland said.

"If there's not a resolution of this by the August (congressional) recess, we'll have to give serious consideration to commencement of the termination process," Steenland said.

Lawmakers are scheduled to leave town for a month in early August.

Steenland said that terminating the company's three pension plans covering 73,000 workers and retirees would probably lengthen Northwest's stay in Chapter 11. The airline filed for bankruptcy last September.

 Steenland said Northwest hopes to emerge from bankruptcy during the first half of 2007, but terminating pensions would slow things down.

It would take several months for a New York bankruptcy judge to weigh any plan by the airline to end its plans, Steenland said.

Rivals United Airlines, a unit of UAL Corp. (UAUA.O: Quote, Profile, Research), and US Airways Group Inc. (LCC.N: Quote, Profile, Research) terminated their plans in bankruptcy to save money and restructure.

Delta plans to terminate its pensions covering pilots but says it might be able to save pension coverage for other employees if Congress approved pension legislation by the recess.

[Soldier4Christ]

House Backs $1.5 Billion For Metro -- With a Hitch
D.C., Md. and Va. Must Match Amount


The House of Representatives passed legislation yesterday that would commit $1.5 billion over 10 years to improve the Metro transit system as long as the District, Maryland and Virginia guarantee to match that money. The vote was 242 to 120, just exceeding the needed two-thirds majority.

The measure, part of a plan to keep trains, tracks, stations and buses in good repair and increase federal oversight, now goes to the Senate, where Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.), sponsor of the House bill, said he hopes passage will be "less of a problem."

"Metro is central to all of the federal activities," Davis said. "In many ways, Metro is the lifeblood of the federal government. Federal workers make up more than half of rush-hour subway riders, and more than 50 federal agencies are located adjacent to subway stations."

The funds would come from federal revenue from offshore drilling operations.

But the federal money, which no other transit system in the country would receive and which Metro says it deserves because of its unique role in carrying federal workers and visitors in the nation's capital, is contingent on a $1.5 billion match from the District, Maryland and Virginia. The regional jurisdictions have to create a major, dedicated source of money for Metro -- such as a portion of a sales tax earmarked for transit -- to cover their share of capital and operational expenses.

The District has approved a measure to dedicate 0.5 percent of city sales tax revenue to Metro, but efforts to establish a stable funding source for the transit authority failed in the Maryland and Virginia legislatures. The Maryland General Assembly is not scheduled to meet again this year, but Virginia's is likely to reconvene this fall to renew its contentious debate on transportation financing.

Davis said he hoped that yesterday's actions will increase the pressure on Maryland and Virginia legislators. "We have a lot of people who don't like spending money on mass transit," he said.

Supporters of the effort say the funding is needed to ensure the future of the nation's second-busiest rail system and fifth-busiest bus system, which are vital to the region's economy. But the task represented significant political challenges for legislators this spring.

Gladys Mack, who chairs Metro's board of directors, welcomed the House vote.

"We are pleased that Mr. Davis and the Congress recognize the importance of a healthy Metro to the workings of the federal government, both on an everyday basis and in an emergency," she said in a statement.

Fiscal conservatives objected to the measure.

"At a time when our nation is engaged in a war against terrorism abroad and faces a growing fiscal crisis at home, the federal government should not be handing a $1.5 billion bailout to the DC Metro System," Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Tex.) said in a statement on his Web site. He chairs the Republican Study Committee's budget and spending task force.

In yesterday's vote, 158 Democrats and 83 Republicans supported the bill; 111 Republicans and 9 Democrats voted against, including Roscoe G. Bartlett (R-Md.), Eric I. Cantor (R-Va.) and Jo Ann S. Davis (R-Va.).

Because the bill did not pass under an expedited procedure earlier in the day, it required a two-thirds majority on the House floor.

By itself, the bill that passed yesterday would not commit any money to the Metro system. The money for Metro was secured through a provision Davis added last month to another House bill that would devote a portion of revenue from offshore drilling to Metro's revitalization.

Both bills still must be voted on by the Senate.

The bill passed yesterday would also require the appointment of an inspector general and add four federal members -- two voting and two alternate -- to Metro's 12-member board of directors. Metro has already established and funded a position for an inspector general, and members said they hope to have one in place by October.

Since the creation of the transit authority in the 1960s, it has relied on money from the federal government, from 10 governments in the Washington area and from its fareboxes.

Metro increased fares in 2003 and 2004 and regularly goes to the local governments for money to meet its budget. For years, Metro's leaders have appealed to local governments to provide a steady, consistent flow of money so the transit system will not have to compete with other public needs, such as education.

[Soldier4Christ]

U.S. House of Representatives votes to allow foreign F-22 sales

Representatives repealed a ban on F-22 Raptor sales to foreign air forces in a voice vote on July 1.

The vote, following an eleven minute debate, repeals a nine year prohibition on foreign sales of the world's most advanced operational fighter jet.

The cost of the F-22 has risen over the years to a flyaway cost of more than $130 million per jet (not including research and development) due to dwindling orders from the only customer - the United States Air Force.

The USAF had originally planned to order 750 F-22s to face the Soviet Union but that number slipped to 350 airframes, and then down again to the current planned buy of only 183 Raptors.

Several different nations including Australia, Japan, Great Britain, and Israel have expressed interest in purchasing F-22s and Lockheed is reportedly interested in selling to those countries if the legalities can be resolved. No decision has yet been made as to which systems, if any, need to be modified or removed from export F-22 aircraft.

[Soldier4Christ]

Bush Holds Veto Pen Over Stem Cell Bill
Bush Holds Veto Pen Over Bill Expanding Federally Funded Stem Cell Research


WASHINGTON - Pleadings from celebrities, a former first lady and fellow Republicans did not move President Bush from his determination to reject, with the first veto of his presidency, a bill expanding federally funded embryonic stem cell research.

Nor was Bush swayed by two days of emotional debate in Congress, punctuated by stories of personal and family suffering, that plunked lawmakers into the intersection of politics, morality and science.

"The president believes strongly that for the purpose of research, it's inappropriate for the federal government to finance something that many people consider murder. He's one of them," spokesman Tony Snow said.

Strong majorities in the House and Senate joined sentiments with most Americans and passed a bill that lifts restriction currently limiting federally funded research to stem cell lines created before Aug. 9, 2001.

But neither the House nor the Senate mustered the two-thirds vote necessary to beat a determined president, although lawmakers planned to try almost as soon as the president vetoes the bill.

That veto was expected as early as Wednesday.

"I expect that the House will sustain the president's veto," said House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio.

Disappointed lawmakers said they intended to keep pushing to lift the restrictions.

"The unfortunate part is, if the president does veto the bill, then it sets us back a year or so until we can finally pass a bill that will have the requisite supermajority to be able to become law," said Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah. "And that sets back embryonic stem cell research another year or so."

The Senate voted 63-37 on Tuesday, four votes short of the two-thirds majority that would be needed to override a veto. The House last year fell 50 votes short of a veto-proof margin when it passed the same bill, 238-194.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., a surgeon who pushed for expanding federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, said Bush in private conversation vowed not to let any more embryos be destroyed for research with federal money on his watch.

Bush has made 141 veto threats during his time in office, and the Republicans controlling Congress typically respond by changing bills to his liking.

Bush's stand against stem cells is popular among conservative Republicans that the party will rely on in the congressional elections this fall. Those opponents are the same voters who have felt alienated by Bush's actions to increase legal immigration, and the veto could bring them back into the fold.

One conservative group, Focus on the Family Action, in Colorado Springs, Colo., praised Bush's "uncommon character and courage in his defense of preborn," while blasting senators who voted against Bush. "Some members of the Senate who should know better voted to destroy human lives and that goes beyond cowardice."

Although many in the religious right are passionately opposed to stem cell research, most Americans support it, and Bush risks alienating that majority in the critical midterm year.

Democrats said two other bills under debate Tuesday were designed to appease voters angry that the GOP-led government had not opened more doors to research.

"Their opposition to stem cell research is outside the American mainstream, so they want to give themselves political cover by voting for two meaningless bills," said Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. "It's a playbook straight from the Republican Orwellian world of politics."

One bill, which passed the Senate but failed in the House, would encourage stem cell research using cells from sources other than embryos in an effort to cure diseases and treat injuries. The other, passed unanimously in the House and Senate, would preemptively ban "fetal farming," the growing and aborting of fetuses for research.

Most disagreement revolved around expanding the embryonic stem cell lines available for federally funded research, which many scientists say hold the promise of treating chronic and degenerative disease.

Bush on Aug. 9, 2001, signed an executive order restricting government funding to research using only the embryonic stem cell "lines" then in existence, groups of stem cells kept alive and propagating in lab dishes.

Proponents said that the bill lifting that restriction also puts strong ethical guidelines in place, requiring donors to give their informed consent for using embryos that would otherwise be discarded.

"Those lives will not begin, but many other lives will end if we do not use all the scientific resources available," said Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa.

Its opponents, including the president, said no conditions would make it ethically appropriate for embryos to be used in scientific research.

On the Net:

Information on the bills, H.R. 810, S. 3504 and S. 2754, may be found at http://thomas.loc.gov

[Soldier4Christ]

Bush makes history with stem-cell veto

There were no cameras to record it, but President Bush made history Wednesday in the confines of his Oval Office by vetoing the first bill of his presidency - legislation that would have increased federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.
The ceremony came 40 minutes later, when Bush strode into the White House's grand East Room, packed with 18 families who have adopted leftover frozen embryos and have used them to bear 24 children - and three more are on the way.
Bush was making the case that those children are the proper use of embryos. Others contend that leftover embryos that aren't donated could be used for research into curing life-altering diseases.
"This bill would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others," Bush said. "It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect."
Most Americans disagree with the president, according to public opinion polls. A number of lawmakers expressed confidence the legislation would someday become law and some suggested Bush's stance could hurt Republicans in congressional elections this fall.
"Mr. President, we will not give up," said Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. "We will continue this battle."
Bush was making good on a promise he made in 2001 to limit federally funded embryonic research to the stem cell lines that had been created by the time.
Bush's added his signature to the bottom of a two-page message that was promptly hand-delivered to the House of Representatives, where the legislation began. Just over five hours later, the House voted 235-193 to override the president's veto, 51 short of the two-thirds majority necessary.
"If we are to find the right ways to advance ethical medical research, we must also be willing when necessary to reject the wrong ways," his message said. "For that reason, I must veto this bill."

[Soldier4Christ]

Senate vote near on filmed-sex bill

The Senate could vote as early as Thursday on legislation that would increase Hollywood's record-keeping requirements for movies and TV shows carrying steamy love scenes.

While the central focus of the legislation is the establishment of a national sex offender registry, it includes a provision that would require Hollywood studios to ensure that they keep records of the ages of the actors who pretend to have sex in motion pictures and TV programs.

According to Senate leadership aides, approval of what is now being called the Adam Walsh Act is expected to come as early as Thursday. The House is expected to accept the Senate's version of the bill with an eye toward getting President Bush to sign it into law July 27, the aides said.

Adam Walsh, the 6-year-old son of "America's Most Wanted" host John Walsh, was abducted from a department store in Hollywood, Fla., on July 27, 1981. The next month, his severed head was found in a Vero Beach, Fla., canal. His other remains have not been recovered, and no one has been convicted of his slaying.

The crimes prompted John Walsh to become a victims' rights advocate and helped spur the formation of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Walsh's outspokenness brought him to host "America's Most Wanted."

Over the past few days, Walsh and his fellow child-welfare advocates have mounted an extensive lobbying effort to win approval of the bill.

While Hollywood isn't thrilled by the bill, the studios didn't want to give the appearance that they are standing in the way of legislation meant to help the government crack down on child abusers.

"To be clear, we support legislation that stops child pornography," said the Motion Picture Assn. of America, the lobbying arm of the major Hollywood studios. "But the original proposal would have subjected studios to criminal penalties, federal searches and near-impossible labeling requirements, none of which would have advanced the stated goal of protecting children. While this latest draft is not a perfect outcome, it is much better than it was." 

 The bill potentially reaching the Senate has been significantly altered to address the concerns of the motion picture industry, contrary to the language first pushed by Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., equating sexy Hollywood fare with hard-core pornography.

Under Pence's original amendment, "any book, magazine, periodical, film, videotape or other matter" that contained a simulated sex scene would come under the same government-filing requirements that adult films must meet.

Currently, any actual filmed sexual activity requires an affidavit that lists the names and ages of the actors who engage in the act. The film is required to have a video label that claims compliance with the law and lists where the custodian of the records can be found. The record-keeping requirement is known as Section 2257, for its citation in federal law. Violators could spend five years in jail.

Pence's provision expanded the definition of sexual activity to include simulated sex acts like those that appear in many movies and TV shows.

According to a draft of the current legislation obtained by The Hollywood Reporter, the makers of movies and TV programs still would have to keep records that verify the actors involved in simulated sex scenes are over 18, but they wouldn't have to keep separate records or a different record for every scene. As long as the studios tell the Justice Department that they keep records of performers' ages under the course of their normal business practices, they will comply with the new language.

Also removed is language that would have subjected makers of movies and TV shows to specific criminal penalties for failing to maintain records of performers' ages.

The new language also does away with requirements that the films carry labels similar to X-rated movies certifying compliance, removes a prohibition against state and local production incentives for movies with simulated sex and would affect only products made after the law goes into effect. It does not give the Justice Department the right to inspect the records whenever it chooses.

[Soldier4Christ]

Senate restricts Corps over levee failures


The Senate voted yesterday to curtail the independence of the US Army Corps of Engineers in deciding flood-control projects, citing New Orleans levees as an example of the agency's shortcomings. The Senate approved a measure that subjects all projects costing more than $40 million to independent review .

[Soldier4Christ]

VA general counsel is 5th to leave since theft


A top Veterans Affairs official criticized after the theft of a laptop containing sensitive information on 26.5 million veterans is leaving to work in the private sector, the department said yesterday. Tim McClain, the VA's general counsel , is the fifth official to leave the department since the May 3 theft .

[Soldier4Christ]

US Senate passes $11.7 billion waterways bill

The U.S. Senate on Wednesday approved an $11.7 billion waterways bill authorizing restoration of wetlands, coastlines and construction of mammoth new locks on the Mississippi and Illinois rivers to speed barges hauling grain, petroleum and other commodities.

The Water Resources Development Act, passed by a voice vote, also stiffens oversight of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers after deficiencies in corps-built levees contributed to the flooding of New Orleans last year.

The omnibus bill authorizes hundreds of Army Corps of Engineers projects, including restoration work on the Florida Everglades and the hurricane-devastated Louisiana coastline.

A similar House of Representatives bill was passed last year and differences with the House version must be worked out before the measure can be sent to President George W. Bush.

It clears the way for the largest-ever U.S. inland waterway project, the $1.8 billion construction of seven new, 1,200-foot-long locks on the upper Mississippi and lower Illinois rivers, along with $1.6 billion in environmental restoration work associated with these facilities.

Backers say the existing 600-foot-locks are outmoded and cause river traffic jams, while the new and larger locks will ease congestion and encourage more exports by reducing the cost of shipping grain, chemicals, cement and other bulk goods.

The National Corn Growers Association says more than 1 billion bushels of grain, or 60 percent of U.S. grain exports, are floated on the Mississippi River to export terminals each year.

One medium-sized barge tow can carry as much grain as 870 trucks, said the bill's sponsor, Missouri Republican Sen. Christopher Bond.

"Our navigable waterways are in environmental and economic decline. Jobs and markets and the availability of habitat for fish and wildlife are at stake," Bond said in debate.

Although the bill authorizes the projects to be built, it does not appropriate funds for them. The Corps of Engineers has a backlog of some $58 billion in authorized projects awaiting funds appropriated in its annual budget of around $2 billion.

The measure, the first waterways authorization bill since 2000, expands that backlog to nearly $70 billion.

But the Senate rejected amendments to alter the way the Corps of Engineers prioritizes its projects, including a cabinet-level committee to determine which are funded first.

The Senate approved an amendment by Wisconsin Sen. Russell Feingold, a Democrat, and Arizona Sen. John McCain, a Republican, to subject Corps of Engineers projects of over $40 million to independent reviews and to requires additional safety checks for flood control projects.

Besides the Mississippi locks, the Everglades and Gulf Coast restoration, the bill authorizes flood control projects in dozens of states from California to South Carolina.

It also restores oyster habitat in the Chesapeake Bay and Long Island Sound and authorizes a permanent electrical barrier to prevent Asian carp from migrating from the Mississippi River system to the Great Lakes via Chicago area shipping canals. The Environmental Protection Agency says the fish, which can exceed four feet and 100 pounds, consume vast amounts of food and would crowd out native Great Lakes fish.

[Soldier4Christ]

US Senate OKs insurance bill shielding US troops

The U.S. Senate on Wednesday approved a bill to protect U.S. soldiers and sailors from abusive and misleading life insurance sales that have cost service members thousands of dollars.

The bill, sponsored by Republican Sen. Michael Enzi of Wyoming, would require the Pentagon to work on sales standards with states, which regulate insurance in the United States, and to create a registry of insurance agents and financial advisors barred from operating on military bases.

A similar bill was passed in the House of Representatives and differences with the House measure must be ironed out in a conference committee.

The legislation comes nearly six years after a Defense Department investigation detailed insurance industry practices that regularly violated Pentagon policies.

These abuses, such as using former military officers as salesmen to young recruits and the sale of life insurance policies offering the same coverage as a government plan but at much higher prices, have cost young soldiers thousands of dollars in premiums.

John Molino, deputy under secretary of defense, told a Senate committee in November that "service members have long been seen as targets for charlatans, con men and others who seek to steal their money with deals 'too good to be true,' or presented under false pretenses."

The problems identified by recent probes involved the sale of life insurance products to service members who did not need them, such as life insurance for personnel with no dependents.

The Pentagon in March updated a 20-year-old directive on insurance sales on military bases that places some new restrictions on financial institutions that sponsor events and provide financial education to military personnel.

[Soldier4Christ]

Lawmakers said to have deal on pension bill

U.S. House and Senate negotiators reached a tentative agreement on legislation to overhaul the employer-provided pension system the chairman of the negotiating group said on Wednesday.

Sen. Mike Enzi, speaking after a negotiating session, said the provisions would be put in writing and the group would meet again on Thursday to finalize the deal.

The Wyoming Republican said issues such as special aid for struggling airlines had been resolved, but declined to give details. He said he expected the completed bill to be voted on in the U.S. House of Representatives next week and then in the U.S. Senate shortly thereafter.

But other lawmakers were less definitive.

"There are some moving parts still," House Majority Leader John Boehner said. The Ohio Republican left the meeting a few minutes before Enzi.

The U.S. system of employer-provided pensions, which pay a fixed amount to retirees, is underfunded by $450 billion and the federal agency that insures them is $22.8 billion in deficit.

Lawmakers are rewriting the rules to try to make companies fully fund these traditional "defined benefit" pensions, which have a payout at retirement based on earnings and years of service. Some airlines, as well as some defense contractors, are seeking special exemptions.

Bankrupt Northwest Airlines Corp. and Delta Air Lines Inc. want 20 years to stretch out pension payments. American Airlines and Continental Airlines, while not in bankruptcy, have also sought relief.

Business lobbyists close to the talks said that while lawmakers were comfortable with providing some airline aid, they had been discussing a range of between 14 and 20 years and might not plug in the number until the last minute.

Defense companies with many employees and fixed government contracts would also like relief from rules that raise pension costs. A plan by Rep. Howard McKeon, a California Republican, would delay the effective date for companies with more than half their business in defense contracts.

Most of the bill deals with defined benefit pensions, which are mainly in older industries; 44 million Americans have them. In addition to making all companies fully fund their plans over several years, the lawmakers are expected to impose tougher funding rules on pension plans deemed "at risk" of default.

Boehner indicated there may still be differences affecting 401(k) plans, which differ from traditional pensions and are basically retirement savings plans.

The issue is whether providers of 401(k)s should be allowed to give investment advice to participants.