Other Political News

[Soldier4Christ]

 Pentagon declares war on internet combat videos

The Pentagon is asking US soldiers in Iraq to stop posting private combat videos on to the internet amid fears that they could be regarded as anti-Arab.

Many of the digital clips feature explosions, gunfire and even dead bodies, with the images often set to a soundtrack of rock ballads, rap or heavy metal music.

Defence officials believe they could be interpreted as portraying the military as unsympathetic to Arabs and obsessed with barbarism.

Dozens of such clips can be found by searching for "Iraq" and "combat" on video-sharing sites such as YouTube.com and Ogrish.com, creating an unprecedented opportunity for the public to view servicemen's unedited perspective of the war.

One cultural commentator described them as "semi-pro snuff films". Such websites have become massively popular, with 70 million videos on YouTube alone.

The spread of the fad among US soldiers has alarmed the military. Soldiers are being instructed by their commanding officers to remove inappropriate footage even though it is technically not against the rules.

A number of the films have been uploaded from Iraq itself, where nearly all US bases have internet facilities.

Hundreds of hours of video shot by three National Guardsmen based near Baghdad were edited by documentary maker Deborah Scranton into a film called The War Tapes, which was shown at a major US arts film festival.

The footage - filmed by Sgt Steve Pink, Specialist Mike Moriarty and Sgt Zack Bazzi - includes a firefight with insurgents and a roadside bomb. It is billed as enabling viewers to get a unique understanding of the "essence" of fighting in Iraq.

The Pentagon was woken up to the potential negative impact of the phenomenon by film of a marine singing a song he had composed called Haji Girl, in which a US soldier falls in love with an Iraqi woman and is then ambushed by her family when he is taken to meet them.

It was criticised last month in the US by the Council on American-Islamic relations, which was outraged by its mocking of the Arabic language and its description of how the marine grabs his girlfriend's little sister when he is attacked.

"As the bullets began to fly, the blood sprayed from between her eyes, and I began to laugh maniacally," the lyrics said.

In Arabic, the word Haji refers to a Muslim who has made the religious pilgrimage to Mecca but it is often used by US troops as a pejorative term for Iraqis.

The song's composer, Cpl Joshua Belile, 23, was required to apologise.

An official investigation was launched, but the military discovered that his behaviour did not breach the marines' policy on internet posting, which is aimed only at ensuring confidentiality about planned combat operations and troop deployments.

The most severe action it could take was to require Cpl Belile to undergo informal counselling.

A new code of conduct on video postings is now being considered.

[Soldier4Christ]

Bush: New Plan to Help End Iraq Violence

President Bush said Tuesday a new plan to increase U.S. and Iraqi forces in the besieged capital of Baghdad will help quell rising violence that is threatening Iraq's transformation to a self- sustaining democracy.

"Obviously the violence in Baghdad is still terrible and therefore there needs to be more troops," Bush said in a White House news conference with visiting Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

 Al-Maliki, on his first trip to the United States since becoming prime minister two months ago, said he and Bush agreed that training and better arming Iraqi forces as quickly as possible, particularly in the capital city, was central to efforts to stabilize the country.

"And, God willing, there will be no civil war in Iraq," al-Maliki said, speaking through a translator.

The two leaders disagreed openly on how to end hostilities between the Hezbollah militia in southern Lebanon and Israel, with al-Maliki, a Shiite Muslim leader, reiterating his support for an immediate cease- fire and Bush sticking by the administration opposition to one.

A group of House Democrats called on GOP leaders to cancel al-Maliki's address to Congress on Wednesday. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said he doubted he would attend and that there were a "large number of people (in Congress) who were uncomfortable" with al-Maliki's condemnation of Israel's attacks in Lebanon and apparent support for Hezbollah

Bush said that al-Maliki had asked for more military equipment from the United States and had recommended increasing U.S. and Iraqi forces patrolling Baghdad neighborhoods. "And we're going to do that," Bush said.

The president said U.S. forces would be moved in from other parts of Iraq. He did not say how many, but Pentagon officials have suggested several thousands troops would be moved to Baghdad, including some now based in Kuwait.

There are roughly 127,000 U.S. troops in Iraq. The administration is under increasing pressure from Democrats and some Republicans to bring a substantial number home by the end of this year.

Asked if the tense situation in Baghdad would alter the equation for an eventual withdrawal of U.S. forces, Bush said troop level decisions will still be based on recommendations from military commanders in the field.

"Conditions change inside a country," Bush said. "Will we be able to deal with the circumstances on the ground? And the answer is, yes, we will."

The president and the prime minister met privately before the news conference to discuss strategy, then continued talks over lunch with a larger group that included Cabinet members and aides.

At the East Room news conference, Bush said al-Maliki was very clear in stating that "he does not want American troops to leave his country until his government can protect the Iraqi people. And I assured him that America will not abandon the Iraqi people."

It was not clear how many U.S. troops will be in Baghdad as a result of the new plan. About two weeks ago, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said that the number of Iraqi and U.S. troops in Baghdad had recently grown from 40,000 to 55,000.

Bush and al-Maliki met alone with only a translator in the room for about 70 minutes before others joined the talks, Bush national security adviser Stephen Hadley told reporters.

Under the plan to beef up security in Baghdad, forces would comb different neighborhoods to establish a police presence, "giving some reassurance to the population there that, in a way, the sheriff has arrived," Hadley said.

Bush complimented the beleaguered leader for his courage and perseverance in the face of sectarian violence. Recent attacks have sapped political support for the more than three-year-old war in Iraq, in both the United States and Iraq.

On Lebanon, the administration insists that Hezbollah must first return two captured Israeli soldiers and stop firing missiles into Israel before any cease-fire.

"I told him (al-Maliki) I support a sustainable cease-fire that will bring about an end to violence," Bush said.

Al-Maliki sidestepped a question at the White House news conference about his position on Hezbollah.

"Here, actually, we're talking about the suffering of a people in a country. And we are not in the process of reviewing one issue or another, or any government position," al-Maliki said.

Democrats criticized al-Maliki's comments. "Prime Minister Maliki missed an important opportunity to state his position on Hezbollah, and instead left the impression that he does not oppose this terrorist organization's outrageous attacks on Israel," said Sen. John Kerry, D- Mass.

Kerry called on Maliki to strongly condemn the use of terror anywhere _ including by Hezbollah against Israel _ in his speech to Congress on Thursday.

Responding to the Democratic criticism, Hadley said "there's an opportunity here I hope we don't miss," and he urged lawmakers to take advantage of the fact that a democratically elected Iraqi leader was about to address Congress. "It's been an issue for Republicans and Democrats, how to get Iraq right," the White House adviser said.

After al-Maliki's speech to Congress on Wednesday, Bush was taking him to nearby Fort Belvoir, Va., for a meeting with U.S. troops and their families. Both leaders will "thank them for their courage and their sacrifice," Bush said.

The president said improved military conditions outside Baghdad will make it possible to move U.S. military police and other forces to the capital, where an estimated 100 people a day are being killed. The crimes, blamed largely on sectarian death squads, usually go unsolved.

Al-Maliki said the most important element of a new security program "is to curb the religious violence."

Iraq's government must have a policy that "there is no killing and discrimination against anyone," al-Maliki said.

U.S. officials believe control of Baghdad _ the political, cultural and economic hub of the country _ will determine the future of Iraq.

U.S. and Iraqi soldiers captured six members of an alleged death squad in Baghdad on Tuesday, while attacks elsewhere in Iraq left more than two dozen dead.

Al-Maliki met Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld at the Pentagon for about an hour. "He is very focused clearly on the Baghdad situation and he recognizes that it is not a military problem as such, it is a combination of political and military and economic," Rumsfeld said.

According to Pentagon spokesman Eric Ruff, no final decision has been made on exactly how many U.S. forces will be shifted to Baghdad, but that there will be a range of forces that include both U.S. and Iraqi troops.

[Soldier4Christ]

Senate passes teen abortion measure

    The bill makes it a crime to take a girl out of state for an abortion without her parents' knowledge.

WASHINGTON - A bill that would make it a crime to take a pregnant girl across state lines for an abortion without her parents' knowledge passed the Senate on Tuesday, but vast differences with the House version stood between the measure and President Bush's desk.

The 65-34 vote gave the Senate's approval to the bill, which would make taking a pregnant girl to another state for the purposes of evading parental notification laws punishable by fines and up to a year in jail.

The girl and her parents would be exempt from prosecution, and the bill contains an exception for abortions performed in this manner that posed a threat to the mother's life.

Republicans said the bill supports what a majority of the public believes: that a parent's right to know takes precedence over a girl's right to have an abortion. Polls have consistently shown overwhelming support for the bill, with about 75 percent saying a parent has the right to give consent before a child younger than 18 has an abortion.

"No parent wants anyone to take their children across state lines or even across the street without their permission," said Senate Majority Whip Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. "This is a fundamental right, and the Congress is right to uphold it in law."

Bush applauded the Senate action and urged the House and Senate to resolve their differences and send him a bill he said he would sign. "Transporting minors across state lines to bypass parental consent laws regarding abortion undermines state law and jeopardizes the lives of young women," he said in a statement.

Fourteen Democrats and 51 Republicans voted for the bill. Four Republicans voted against it: Sens. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, Susan Collins of Maine, Olympia Snowe of Maine and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., was absent.

Both Florida senators, Republican Mel Martinez and Democrat Bill Nelson, voted in favor of the bill.

Democrats sought an exemption for confidants to whom a girl with abusive parents might turn for help. They also said the measure is designed chiefly to energize the Republican party's base of conservative voters.

"Congress ought to have higher priorities than turning grandparents into criminals," said Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass.

Significant differences exist between the Senate bill and a measure passed by the House last year.

Unlike the Senate bill, the House measure sets out a national parental notification law. It would require a physician who knowingly performs or induces an abortion on a minor who is a resident of another state to provide notice of at least 24 hours to a parent before ending the pregnancy.

States that do not have parental notification or consent laws are Washington, Oregon, New York, Vermont, Rhode Island and Connecticut. The District of Columbia also does not have such laws.

Democrats said the bill would be dangerous to pregnant teens who have abusive or neglectful parents by discouraging others from helping them.

"We're going to sacrifice a lot of girls' lives," said Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y.

However, there is no data that indicates how many girls get abortions in this way, or who helps them do it. And Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., said opponents "want to strip the overwhelming majority of good parents their rightful role and responsibility because of the misbehavior of a few."

[Soldier4Christ]

Phone records lawsuit dismissed


A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit against AT&T Inc. that accused the phone company of turning over customer records to the government without a court order, siding with Justice Department lawyers who invoked the "state secrets" privilege.

The attorneys had argued this month that if the suit went ahead the government would be forced to confirm or deny the existence of such a relationship with AT&T, and that disclosure would compromise national security and potentially aid terrorists.

U.S. District Judge Matthew Kennelly found that the government's invoking of the privilege leaves too little information for the plaintiffs, led by the American Civil Liberties Union and Chicago author Studs Terkel, to establish that they have suffered harm through data disclosures.

The suit claimed the phone giant violated the privacy of its customers by giving records to the National Security Agency.

"First, the Terkel plaintiffs cannot establish whether AT&T has unlawfully disclosed their records in the past," Kennelly wrote in a ruling issued Tuesday.

"Second, the plaintiffs cannot establish whether AT&T is currently disclosing their records, which would tend to show that there is a real and immediate threat of repeated injury."

The government has attempted to use the privilege to block similar claims around the country, a tactic that has drawn some criticism. ACLU of Illinois legal director Harvey Grossman said in a statement: "A private company, AT&T, should not be able to escape accountability for violating a federal statute and the privacy of their customers on the basis that a program widely discussed in public is secret.

"Members of Congress publicly discussed the program of gathering data from telephone companies without lawful authorization in violation of existing federal law," Grossman said.

AT&T said the company is gratified by the decision.

"As we have said all along, at AT&T we prize our customers' privacy and we also recognize our obligation to assist law enforcement agencies," the statement read. "AT&T is fully committed to protecting our customers' privacy and we would not provide customer information to any government agency except as specifically authorized under the law."

Kennelley wrote that his ruling does not close the door on the ACLU or anyone else challenging such data gathering.

"Nothing in this opinion, however, prevents the plaintiffs from using the legislative process, not to mention their right to free speech, to seek further inquiry by the executive and legislative branches into the allegations in their complaint," Kennelly wrote.

[Soldier4Christ]

House backs crack down on child predators

The U.S. House of Representatives gave final approval on Tuesday to bipartisan legislation cracking down on sexual predators and child abuse.

The Senate approved the bill last week and sponsors expect President George W. Bush to sign it on Thursday, the 25th anniversary of the murder of six-year old Adam Walsh, for whom the bill is named.

"This important measure will arm our states and local communities with the tools they need to combat the threats posed by sex offenders and violent criminals," Majority Leader John Boehner, an Ohio Republican, said.

Adam Walsh's father John became an anti-crime advocate and later the host of the popular television show, "America's Most Wanted," which profiles cases and encourages the public to help catch criminals.

The bill would expand registries of offenders and toughen penalties for people who prey on children through crimes such as sex trafficking, abuse and pornography including crimes committed through the Internet.

The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children estimates that there are more than 560,000 registered sex offenders in the United States. About 100,000 are not registered or do not have up-to-date registrations.

The legislation would create a national sex offender registry to plug gaps in existing state system and community notification requirements. The register would be available to the public. An offender who does not keep his registration up to date in any state in which he lives, works or attends school could face felony charges and up to 10 years in prison.

It would also create a registry for substantiated cases of child abuse or neglect to help law enforcement and child protective services.

Addressing concern about Internet predators and online pornography, the bill establishes education grants, and adds 200 new federal prosecutors and 45 new computer forensic scientists to work on such crimes.

Separately, the House also approved by voice vote a bill authorizing up to $4 billion during five years for child abuse prevention and improvement of monitoring children in foster care. It must be reconciled with companion Senate legislation.

[Soldier4Christ]

Schwarzenegger on hot seat
VOTERS GRILL GOVERNOR ON IMMIGRATION AT Q&A

LA MESA - A heavily Republican crowd grilled Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger during a campaign appearance in San Diego County on Tuesday, badgering the governor to justify his position on immigration.

Typically, such sessions are a breeze for the gregarious governor, in part because they are publicized among local Republicans to ensure a heavy partisan turnout. Less so Tuesday, when Schwarzenegger, who is seeking a second term, saw firsthand how incendiary an issue immigration still is for many Republicans.

Some political analysts believe the governor is pushing the boundaries of how much he can woo Latinos before he risks alienating his party faithful. Immigration ranked as the No. 1 concern among Republican voters in a major poll released Tuesday.

During a question-and-answer session with 150 people at Harry Griffen Park in La Mesa, the governor never lost his composure, but he did lose at least one vote.

Where precisely are the National Guard members now along the border with Mexico, asked 66-year-old Sally Plata, who later identified herself as a volunteer with the Minuteman Project border patrol.

``I voted for you. And right now, I don't see much difference between you and Phil Angelines,'' Plata said, mispronouncing the name of the governor's Democratic challenger. ``I don't see that you're standing up for the citizens of California,'' she said to scattered boos and applause from different factions of the audience.

``Well, thank you for the compliment,'' the governor joked. National Guard members are indeed on duty at the border now. But he understands the ``frustration'' because the federal government has done a ``terrible job'' on immigration.

Then came a question from a woman who likened Schwarzenegger to Ronald Reagan and asked politely for a photograph with him. But she also quoted a local talk radio host, saying she wanted ``my country back'' from illegal immigrants.

The governor was empathetic, but added, `I think it's very important to never get mad at anyone that is trying to come to this country,'' some of whom are fleeing economic ``misery,'' the governor said. Direct the anger at the federal government.

As the governor spoke, Plata interjected from the crowd.

``Please don't interrupt me when I talk. Thank you very much,'' Schwarzenegger bristled. ``I let you talk also.''

A Field Poll released Tuesday showed Schwarzenegger leading Phil Angelides by 8 percentage points. And he enjoys 85 percent support from the GOP.

Insurance agency owner Brad Boswell belongs to the other 15 percent of Republicans. The self-described law-and-order activist drilled in on the governor's parole policies.

Schwarzenegger has been far more receptive than his predecessor to the parole pleas of murderers, kidnappers and others serving life terms in the state prison system. As of this spring, the governor had permitted parole for 116 ``lifers,'' most of them convicted murderers, according to parole board data. That's only a fraction of the people eligible for parole.

``I'm very, very concerned about your record on crime,'' Boswell said.

The governor said he was ``very proud that we have been tough on crime.'' And he urged passage of the anti-sex-offender Jessica's Law ballot initiative in November.

Later, Boswell said he would vote for a minor party candidate. ``I'm not supporting this guy.''

The rest of the governor's day went smoothly. Adoring crowds greeted him at Sweet Lumpy's BBQ in Temecula. He sampled homemade guacamole and bought $30.79 worth of grapes and strawberries at Tom's Farms in Corona. He posed for countless photos at a Starbucks in the upscale Victoria Gardens mall in Rancho Cucamonga.

Speaking to reporters who followed his green campaign bus all day, Schwarzenegger said the vigorous give-and-take seen in La Mesa was ``terrific,'' because it lets him know what Californians care about. Still, he was startled by ``the intensity of prejudice,'' he heard, including the comment about taking back California.

Schwarzenegger, who voted for the anti-illegal-immigrant Proposition 187 in 1994, also explained his recent statement to the Spanish-language newspaper La Opinión that he was wrong to do so.

The governor has long said all kids deserve access to education, and more recently, he also has piped up for health care for all kids -- flouting the spirit of Proposition 187. Still, Angelides accused him of an ``election year conversion'' on the matter.

Schwarzenegger said his philosophy had changed because of his experiences ``in the trenches'' of youth sports and after-school programs. ``Maybe that will rub some people the wrong way, so be it.''

[Soldier4Christ]

White House has draft bill on terror trials

The White House has drafted legislation covering trials of terror detainees that would allow hearsay evidence and let defendants be excluded from trials to protect national security, The New York Times reported in Wednesday's edition.

The Times said a draft of the proposal was being circulated within the administration and among military lawyers at the Pentagon. The present draft preserves the idea of using military commissions to prosecute terror suspects and makes only modest changes in their procedural rules, including some expanded protections for defendants.

President George W. Bush wants to push a bill through Congress this fall to allow trials of suspects held at the U.S. naval facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, after the Supreme Court said the military commissions Bush set up were not in accord with U.S. or international laws.

The plan could run into trouble in Congress where some lawmakers have said they want to base the new rules on the military code of justice that would significantly expand detainee's rights.

The Times said the draft measure notes that military court-martial procedures are "not practicable in trying enemy combatants" because doing so would "require the government to share classified information" and exclude "hearsay evidence determined to be ... reliable."

Rather than requiring a speedy trial for enemy combatants, the draft says they "may be tried and punished at any time without limitations," the Times said.

The draft legislation would bar "statements obtained by the use of torture" for use as evidence, but evidence obtained in interrogations where coercion was used would be admissible unless found "unreliable" by a military judge. To prevent them hearing classified evidence, the Times said the draft would allow defendants to be barred from trials, but would require them be given a summary of the information.

The report cited deputy White House press secretary Dana Perino as saying the administration was "working to strike a balance of a fair system of justice that deals with terrorists who don't recognize the rules of war."

The copy of the draft legislation provided to the Times was labeled "for discussion purposes only, deliberative draft, close hold," the report said, and the official who shared it did so on condition of anonymity.

The Times cited Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican and former military lawyer who has seen the draft measure as calling it "a good start" but adding, "I have some concerns." He declined to be specific, saying he wanted to withhold judgment until hearing the views of military lawyers.

[Soldier4Christ]

State Supreme Court to rule on gay marriage today

The Washington State Supreme Court's long-anticipated ruling on the right of gays and lesbians to marry in this state will be issued today.

First argued before the high court 16 months ago, Andersen vs. King County involves 19 gay and lesbian couples from across the state who challenged the constitutionality of Washington's Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Passed overwhelmingly by the Legislature in 1998, the law limits marriage to one man and one woman.

Experts see three likely outcomes: One upholds DOMA, another strikes it down, granting gays and lesbians the right to marry, and a third punts the question to the Legislature. The couples, if they lose, can't appeal. Their suit is based on state constitutional law and the Supreme Court, for them is the end of the line.

If the court strikes down DOMA, Washington would become the second state in the country, after Massachusetts, to offer same-sex marriages and the first to extend the benefit to those who live outside the state.

Lisa Stone, executive director of the Northwest Women's Law Center, one of three organizations that sued on the couples' behalf, said "We've always thought the law was on our side. Washington's constitution is strong and protective of individual rights and we believe the court will find that, too."

Doug Honig, spokesman for the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington, which also argued on the couple's behalf, said "We have high hopes that it will be a ruling in favor of fairness and equality for all families in the state."

The Rev. Joseph Fuiten, chairman of the Faith and Freedom Network, a conservative evangelical lobbying group that opposes same-sex marriage, said "I have been on both sides of this: it's going to come our way, it will go the other way. I've alternated on a daily basis for 16 months.

"I wish I were a prophet."

The country is deeply divided on the rights of gays and lesbians to marry. Andersen vs. King County represents one of the most important social questions to confront the state's high court in a decade and is one of the most controversial.

In 2004, the couples first filed two separate lawsuits challenging DOMA — one against King County the other against the state of Washington. Separately, Superior Court justices in King and Thurston counties ruled in their favor of the couples, striking down the state statute that denied them the right to marry. On appeal, the cases were merged into one and argued before the nine justices of the Supreme Court last year.

"Whichever way goes, it will be an important and influential decision in the ongoing courthouse battles across the country over the redefinition or not or marriage," said Monte Stewart, a Constitutional law expert, and former U.S. Attorney in Nevada.

State Sen. Dan Swecker, R-Rochester, said if the court strikes down DOMA, he's pretty certain Republican leaders would immediately call for a special session. But such a session would be up to the Democrats. Unlike when lawmakers overwhelmingly passed DOMA in 1998, Republicans are now in the minority in both the House and Senate.

If the court rules against the couples, Washington would follow New York, where the Court of Appeals — the state's highest court — earlier this month ruled 4-2 against same-sex marriage. The justices argued that limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples could be based on the notion that children benefit from being raised by two natural parents.

Julie Shapiro, associate law professor at Seattle University said it's not unreasonable to think that the justices will be paying attention to U.S. and world occurrences that might impact the case. "It's not like it's a jury that's sequestered. They can and do know what's changing in the world."

Just to be sure, Rev. Fuiten, who was one of several evangelical ministers to intervene as defendants in the King County lawsuit, said the justices were provided information on the New York ruling.

"You don't think of New York as a bastion of conservativeism," Fuiten said. "It's not just conservative states that have gone that way. All the court decisions are going in our favor. Every vote has gone our way."

But calling the New York decision "legally fairly weak," Stone said it does not unduly concern gay marriage advocates in Washington. "Our Constitution is different and our DOMA is different from New York's," she said.

[Soldier4Christ]

Congress passes molester database
Would make locations public

WASHINGTON -- Finding the nearest convicted child molester might be as easy as punching in a ZIP code on a computer keyboard, under a bill that cleared Congress yesterday.

The House passed and sent to President Bush legislation establishing a national Internet database designed to let law enforcement and communities know where convicted sex offenders live and work.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales applauded its passage. ``America's children will be better protected from every parent's worst nightmare -- sexual predators," he said.

The most serious offenders would be registered on a national database for a lifetime. All sex offenders could face a felony charge, punishable by 10 years in prison, for failing to update the information. ``This legislation would make it crystal clear to sex offenders, you better register, you better keep the information current, or you're going to jail," said Representative James Sensenbrenner, Republican of Wisconsin.

The House passed it by voice vote. The Senate approved it with a voice vote last week.

Sensenbrenner, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said there are half a million sex offenders in the United States and as many as 100,000 are not registered, their locations unknown to the public and police.

Convicted criminals required to register will have to do so, in person, in each state where they intend to live, work, or go to school.

``It's time for all of our families to have access to this information," said Representative Earl Pomeroy, Democrat of North Dakota.

Child advocates have said the bill offers the most sweeping effort to combat pedophiles in years. It is named for Adam Walsh, the murdered son of ``America's Most Wanted" host John Walsh.

``We used to track library books better than we do sex offenders, but this bill will even that score," said Representative Mark Foley, Republican of Florida.

One initiative would require sex offenders to wear tracking devices during their supervised releases.

The bill increases criminal penalties for child predators, including a mandatory minimum 25-year prison sentence for kidnapping or maiming a child and a 30-year sentence for sex with a child under 12 or for sexually assaulting anyone between 13 and 17 years old.

A new racketeering-style offense for people who commit two or more crimes against children would carry a mandatory 20-year sentence. Repeat child sex offenders would face harsher penalties.

The bill also authorizes new crime prevention and child fingerprinting campaigns, along with new grant programs to combat the sexual abuse of children.

[Soldier4Christ]

State Supreme Court upholds gay marriage ban

The Washington Supreme Court today upheld the state's 1998 ban on same-sex marriage — a ruling decried by gay activists but heralded by supporters of traditional marriage.

The decision came as a sobering defeat for gays and their advocates, who'd hoped the court would strike down the so-named Defense of Marriage Act — DOMA — which restricts marriage to one man and one woman.

Writing for a 5-4 majority, Justice Barbara Madsen said DOMA is constitutional because in establishing DOMA "the legislation was entitled to believe that limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples furthers procreation, essential to the survival of the human race and furthers the well-being of children by encouraging families where children are reared in homes headed by children's biological parents."

As such, DOMA does not violate the state Constitution's privileges and immunities clause of the state Constitution, which requires that any benefit granted to one group must be granted equally to all. "Allowing same sex couples to marry does not, in the legislature's view, further these purposes," she wrote.

Although the ruling was the judiciary's final word on gay marriage, it seemed to suggest that the legislature could act to provide civil unions or marriage to same-sex couples. The justices said given the clear hardship faced by same-sex couples evidenced in the lawsuit, the legislature may want to re-examine the impact of the marriage laws on all citizens of this state.

Madsen was joined by Chief Justice Gerry Alexander and Justice Charles Johnson. Justices James Johnson and Richard Sanders joined the majority in a separate concurrence. Justices Bobbe Bridge, Mary Fairhurst, Susan Owens and Tom Chambers dissented.

Madsen wrote that the plaintiffs did not sufficiently show that gays are members of a suspect class — a reference to groups entitled to protection against discrimination by virtue of characteristics such as race – or that there is a fundamental right to marriage that includes the right to marry a person of the same sex. Therefore, the Legislature's decision that only opposite-sex couples are entitled to civil marriage is a "rational basis" for the Defense of Marriage Act.

DOMA, the majority found, also does not violate the due process clause of the state Constitution, which states that "No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

"The people of Washington have not had in the past, nor at this time are they entitled to an expectation that they may choose to marry a person of the same sex," Madsen wrote.

Additionally, the court wrote, DOMA does not violate the state's Equal Rights Amendment, so-called ERA, because the law treats men and women equally in denying both the right to marry someone of the same sex.

Legislators quickly weighed in on the contentious issue.

Sen. Dan Swecker, R-Rochester, said the "Supreme Court's ruling is in line with the public's wishes."

"I think that, historically, marriage has been about providing for the next generation, and that it is only in the modern era that we've decided the issue is love between two people," Swecker said. "Love comes and goes, but a commitment to the next generation has to be sustainable. If we start to redefine marriage, it will diminish our commitment to marriage and stable families for future generations."

Sen. Lisa Brown, leader of the Democratic majority in the Senate, said Democrats don't have a unified position gay marriage. In the upcoming session, said Brown, D-Spokane, there will likely be "calls for full marriage equality for same-sex couples (as in Massachusetts), for civil unions (as in Vermont) and for a constitutional amendment banning both (as in Utah)."

In a strongly-worded dissent, Justice Bridge wrote that DOMA's "religious and moral strains" make it an unconstitutional breach of the church-state wall. The majority's deference to the Legislature "too early dismisses the proper role of the judiciary to protect the constitutional rights of those who have been historically disenfranchised from the political process," she wrote.

Had the court struck down the law, Washington would have become only the second state in the nation, after Massachusetts, to allow same-sex couples to marry.

Washington passed DOMA in 1998, two years after the federal government passed such a law, defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman. Since then, a majority of states have passed similar gay-marriage bans.

Two separate lawsuits challenging the Washington statute were filed in 2004 — one against King County, the other against the state — by 19 gay and lesbian couples seeking the right to marry or to have their marriages from elsewhere recognized in this state.

In each of those cases, a Superior Court judge sided with the plaintiffs, applying different analyses to declare the state's DOMA unconstitutional. The two cases were merged into one for the appeal to the Supreme Court, which was argued March 8, 2005, by attorneys for both sides.

The couples based their claim to marriage on specific principles of constitutional law. Central to their claim was that the ban on same-sex marriage violates the state constitution's "privileges and immunities" clause, which requires that any privilege offered to one group be offered to all.

Those defending the law argued that the statute served a legitimate purpose in that the state has an interest in protecting children, and thus in the relationships that produce them.

But the couples called DOMA a scheme "that favors one class of children, not because of the way they were created but because of the identity of their parents."

The plaintiffs also argued that marriage is a fundamental right, while the state and other defendants said that same-sex marriage has no roots in the nation's history and tradition.

And the sides disagreed over whether gays are considered a so-called suspect class — a reference to groups entitled to protection against discrimination by virtue of such characteristics as race or gender.

[Soldier4Christ]

Bill to expand oil drilling moves forward in Senate


WASHINGTON - The Senate is poised to pass legislation that would open a vast portion of the Gulf of Mexico to oil and gas exploration, after a landslide vote Wednesday allowed debate on the measure to advance over environmentalists' objections.

The vote to proceed was 86-12, showing broad support for the legislation, which could give energy companies and Gulf Coast states their best prospects for new oil and gas exploration since a nationwide moratorium on offshore drilling was imposed in 1981.

The Senate bill would open 8.3 million acres of the central Gulf of Mexico to drilling in an area 125 miles south of Florida's Panhandle and 230 to 325 miles west of its western shore. The Senate is expected to pass the legislation next week.

The House of Representatives already passed a far broader bill that would end the moratorium everywhere and permit oil rigs and drilling anywhere at least 50 miles off any coast unless a state legislature moved its dividing line to 100 miles from shore.

Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., a key supporter of the Senate bill, said there was no chance this year that the Senate would agree to the House's plan, which is feared by environmentalists and many lawmakers in Florida, California and other states along the East and West coasts. Brian Kennedy, a spokesman for House Resources Committee Chairman Richard Pombo, R-Calif., said the House wouldn't accept the Senate bill.

Martinez urged the House to pass the Senate version rather than seek leverage for the House bill in a House-Senate conference committee this fall. Otherwise, he said, "we probably won't have a bill. ... It's not, like, open for bidding."

With the House set to leave at the end of this week for a month-long recess, it could be September before prospects for an agreement that can clear Congress come into focus.

Supporters of the Senate legislation on Wednesday championed its prospects for fostering cheaper natural gas and more domestic oil, at a time when high prices are hurting manufacturers and consumers. They also highlighted the bill's relative restraint.

"We can't drill our way out of this situation, but neither can we conserve our way," said Sen. Mary Landrieu, a Democrat from Louisiana, one of four Gulf Coast states - the others are Texas, Mississippi and Alabama - that stand to reap millions of dollars in federal revenue-sharing under either the House or Senate plan. Of the Senate bill, she said, "It's not an Atlantic bill. It's not a Pacific bill. It's a Gulf Coast bill."

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he planned to support the bill, but environmental critics maintain that it would open a Pandora's box and could start the undoing of the nationwide offshore moratorium.

"For the Senate to actually vote to eliminate one part of the nation's moratorium would be a terrible precedent," said Mark Ferrulo, the director of the Florida Public Interest Research Group.

In a conference call earlier this week with officials of the Sierra Club, an environmental group, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican who's facing re-election in a Democrat-dominated state whose voters generally oppose offshore drilling, worried that even the Senate bill "could lead to the weakening of the moratorium that has protected the California coast for 25 years."

The Senate bill would tap into at least six times as much liquefied natural gas as the nation imports, and more oil than the reserves of Wyoming and Oklahoma combined, supporters said.

Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., the lead sponsor of the Senate bill, inadvertently bolstered its opponents' concerns that his measure is only the opening wedge in a broader goal of eliminating the entire moratorium for other U.S. coastlines. Domenici said he didn't disagree with the House approach, he just didn't think it could pass the Senate this year.

"There's bigger future things we can do, but for right now, impact in the next couple of years, this is it," he said. "This is the first step."

[Soldier4Christ]

House, Senate pass foreign-investment bills

 The House passed its bill on a 424-0 vote, while the Senate approved its version of the bill by voice vote.
House and Senate negotiators must now work to iron out differences between the two pieces of legislation, which were inspired by the political backlash that followed a Dubai-owned company's effort earlier this year to acquire management rights at several major U.S. seaports.
Both bills would require the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, to add a 45-day national-security review to the process before allowing a transaction to proceed.
The House bill also increases the roles played by the secretaries of commerce and homeland security, with both serving as vice chairs of the committee. The interagency panel is chaired by the secretary of the treasury. The Senate bill would add the secretary of defense as the vice chairman.
The Senate bill also requires the executive branch to notify lawmakers when foreign companies seek to purchase U.S. companies.
"This bill strengthens the CFIUS review process in a number of ways, including by explicitly establishing a system of congressional notification that had previously been lacking," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn.
The notification requirement that has drawn the ire of some business groups and House members, however, who fear that such information could foster political interference.
Efforts to change the review process began earlier this year after Dubai Ports World, a state-owned company, was set to take over a number of major U.S. ports that were managed by a British firm. Facing congressional concern about national security, the Dubai company backed out of the deal.
"The Dubai Ports World fiasco exposed serious flaws with the CFIUS process," said House Majority Whip Roy Blunt, R-Mo. "The bill the House passed today is a common-sense fix to the problem that protects Americans first without hindering job growth and economic expansion."

[Soldier4Christ]

Senate Approves Burma Sanctions Extension

The Senate, by voice vote, approved the bill extending the 2003 Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, which bans imports from Burma.

The bill's sponsor, Republican Senator Mitch McConnell, of Kentucky, says the sanctions are supported by the people of Burma, where the military refuses to hand over power to a government elected in 1990, and where democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi remains under house arrest.

"Passage of this bill would mean continued sanctions against the illegitimate, dictatorial regime that currently holds Burma literally in its grip," he said.

Senator John McCain, an Arizona Republican, says the situation in Burma continues to worsen.   He says the military junta controls the population through a campaign of violence and terror, murdering political opponents, using child soldiers and forced labor, and employing rape as a weapon of war.

McCain criticized the international community for not following the U.S. lead in taking a hard line against the Burmese regime.

"Nine years after Burma joined ASEAN, Southeast Asian nations remain too passive in the face of Burma's outrages," said Mr. McCain.  "The European Union has recently announced it will waive a travel ban on Burma's top leaders so that Burma's foreign minister can attend the Asia-Europe meetings in Finland this September.  It is hard to see what new actions the Burmese junta must commit in order to induce the world to treat the junta like the pariah it wishes to be."

Burma is expected to be on the agenda at the Association of Southeast Asian Nations regional forum this week in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, which U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice plans to attend.

The House of Representatives approved the Burma sanctions bill earlier this month.  President Bush is expected to sign the measure.

[Soldier4Christ]

Outlook dims in Senate for online gambling bill


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Prospects have dimmed for swift U.S. Senate passage of a bill to outlaw most forms of Internet gambling as industry trade groups and lawmakers raise objections, congressional sources said on Wednesday.

Efforts to move a House-passed measure through the Senate have run into opposition from lobbyists representing casino owners and horse- and dog-racing interests in recent days. Some Republican senators have broken ranks and placed "holds" on it, the sources said.

"The House-passed bill is not going to pass the Senate," said one source who is knowledgeable about the legislation, adding that changes must be made to win sufficient support.

The industry is a major contributor to some congressional campaigns and sources said opposition could stir up new trouble among senators such as Republicans Jim Bunning and Mitch McConell of Kentucky or Democrat Harry Reid of Nevada.

The bill would prohibit most forms of Internet gambling and make it illegal for banks and credit card companies to make payments to online gambling sites.

The Republican-backed measure has been criticized by some as an election-year appeal to the party's conservative base.

Supporters of a crackdown on Internet gambling say legislation is needed to clarify that a 1961 federal law banning interstate telephone betting also covers an array of online gambling.

Backers of the legislation, led by Arizona Republican Sen. Jon Kyl, have been trying to build support and resolve differences as the Senate focuses on other legislative matters and gets ready for a month-long break.

However, congressional aides said some Republican senators have placed holds on the bill, and that Democratic senators may eventually do so as well depending on how talks proceed.

The bill was not among the priorities outlined by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a Tennessee Republican, during a session with reporters on Tuesday in which he laid out measures he hopes to wrap up before the August vacation.

Any member of the Senate may place a secret "hold" on legislation, which prevents it from being brought up for a vote until concerns about the measure are resolved.

One aide said concerns had been voiced by representatives of casinos as well as horse-racing tracks, dog tracks and lotteries about limited exemptions in the bill.

So far in 2006, the casino and gambling industry has given more than $6.4 million to federal candidates, according to the nonprofit Center for Responsive Politics. That amount places it 30th among the more than 80 industries tracked by the organization.

"There is always a chance that differences can be resolved and the Senate could vote before the August recess, but not a very good one at this point," one aide said.

In order to win support, Kyl may have to amend the Senate bill and ask House lawmakers to revisit a similar amended version, other sources said.

Supporters could take up the bill when the Senate reconvenes in September. But it would be difficult to work out changes in time for members of Congress to return to their districts to campaign before the November elections.

[Soldier4Christ]

Senate approval of China bill more likely

Chances have increased the Senate will approve legislation threatening China with steep tariffs on its exports to the United States because of Beijing's currency policy, a U.S. senator said on Wednesday.

"The bottom line is our legislation is looking more like a reality," Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, said just a few hours before meeting with U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson to discuss the currency issue.

Schumer and Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, are authors of legislation threatening China with a 27.5 percent tariff on its exports to the United States if it does not revalue its yuan more.

The legislation enjoys broad support in Congress, but the senators have delayed a vote on their bill several times to give China more time to act on its own. They recently said they would seek a vote on the bill by the end of the year.

The two senators are meeting with Paulson on Wednesday for the first time to discuss what steps the United States should take to press Beijing to adopt a more flexible exchange rate.

China revalued its currency by 2.1 percent to 8.11 per dollar a year ago, and the yuan has strengthened only slightly since then. Schumer and Graham contend the yuan is undervalued by 15 to 40 percent against the U.S. dollar.

The two senators traveled to China earlier this year to meet with Chinese leaders on the issue.

"We are disappointed since our trip with the total lack of movement and we want to hear what Secretary Paulson has to say," Schumer said.

Schumer and Graham were a constant burr in the side of Paulson's predecessor John Snow on the China currency issue, and appear set to play the same role with Paulson.