Blog from The Washington Independent - U.S. news and politics - washingtonindependent.com

Press Beats Farm Bill to a Pulp

Mike Lillis — Fri, 16 May 2008 19:32:45 GMT

Even as congressional lawmakers from both parties are patting themselves on the back for their fine work pushing through a $300 billion farm bill this week, the nation's editorials pages had a different story to tell:

From The Washington Post (5-16):

The farm bill is the epitome of old-style Washington politics. A small number of farm-state senators from both parties demanded its most wasteful provisions, such as guaranteed payments to big cotton and rice growers and "disaster relief" for farmers in arid areas. These members of the less-representative body leveraged their right to filibuster into billions of dollars for people who are better off than the average taxpayer. The bill includes only the most tepid reforms, which, though trumpeted by the bill's advocates, deny benefits to only a tiny handful of farms.

The New York Times (5-16):

The bill is an inglorious piece of work tailored to the needs of big agriculture and championed by not only the usual bipartisan farm state legislators but also the Democratic leaders, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Every five years we get a new farm bill, and each time we are reminded that even reformers like Ms. Pelosi cannot resist the blandishments and power of the farmers.

The Los Angeles Times (5-15):

[A] historic opportunity to end this country's most wasteful and economically ruinous corporate welfare system has been lost.

The Christian Science Monitor (5-14):

Congress plans to renew the US agriculture law this week with no apologies for that fact that most of the subsidies will go to the wealthiest 10 percent of recipients and that a majority of this largess will enrich commercial farmers with an average income of $200,000.

[snip]

What makes this payoff to corporate farmers so indigestible this time around is that it comes when food producers are making record profits from high global prices and subsidies for grain- and sugar-based ethanol. Since the last renewal of the farm law in 2002, farmer income and crop prices have more than doubled.

The Rocky Mountain News (5-16):

Today, roughly 1 percent of Americans live on farms, when nearly a third did a century ago - and net cash income is expected to set a record this year of $96.6 billion. It's indefensible to expect every American to subsidize the few who are doing fine.

Too bad for the sugar industry they don't run their own paper.

Congress Moves to Kill Bush's Media Consolidation Rules

Mike Lillis — Fri, 16 May 2008 18:30:00 GMT

The Senate last night approved a binding resolution to scrap new Bush administration rules allowing newspapers to buy up television and radio stations in the nation's largest media outlets. Supported by the White House, the Republican majority of the Federal Communications Commission passed the rules in December, arguing that the greater consolidation will save flailing newspapers by allowing them to consolidate costs.

But opponents of the changes, led by Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.), say they will empower companies to control too much of the public messaging in certain communities. On the Senate floor yesterday, Dorgan said:

The issue here is simple. We have far too much concentration in the media. The Federal Communications Commission, at least the Chairman and two others who have been members, have become cheerleaders of more concentration. That means less localism. It means your local radio station, in many cases your television station, other media outlets, are run by somebody living 1,500 miles away, running homogenized music through a radio station having nothing to do with covering the local baseball team or news events. I think this moves in exactly the wrong direction.

The bill now moves to the House, where Rep. Jay Inslee (D-Wash.) is pushing the same bill. The White House is expected to veto the measure, but media consolidation is one of those rare issues that unites the opposition of both parties. (The Senate voice-vote was nearly unanimous, with vocal opposition from just two members, Georgia GOP Sens. Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson.)

With more and more congressional Republicans beginning to distance themselves from an unpopular Bush administration, this issue could produce yet another successful veto override.

Obama Defends Foreign Policy, Attacks Bush, McCain

Jeremy P. Jacobs — Fri, 16 May 2008 18:12:47 GMT

Yesterday Bush played the Nazi card, insinuating before the Israeli Parliament that Obama would negotiate with terrorist groups. Furor ensued.

Today Obama struck back.

"After almost eight years, I did not think I could be surprised by anything George Bush says, but I was wrong," Obama, avec flag pin, said.
"The president did something that presidents don't do..that is launch a political attack targeted toward the domestic audience...in front of a foreign delegation."

Obama also went on offense, attacking Bush and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) for their foreign policy positions, which he called one and the same. "I want to be perfectly clear," he said, "if George Bush and John McCain want to have a debate about protecting the United States of America, that is a debate I am happy to have any time, any place. And it is a debate that I will win."

Obama called his approach to foreign policy "tough diplomacy" and also said he never claimed he would negotiate with terrorist groups like Hamas.

A couple thoughts on this entire exchange: First, it is interesting how forcefully Bush, with his sub-30 point approval rating, can influence the presidential race. And there is no question he knew what he was doing. Second, the Obama camp clearly views the perception of Obama being weak in his support of Israel as a soft-spot. Consequently, Obama has been on a all out media tour to promote his support of Israel. (Obama has recently given interviews on Israel to the Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg, The New Republic's Martin Peretz, and the New York Times' David Brooks.)

Third, that being said, Bush's remarks may actually be a gift for Obama since they shift the campaign narrative from his big loss in West Virginia and have unified the party behind him (even Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) criticized Bush), as MSNBC's First Read noted.

Fourth, even so, does Obama want his campaign to be defined by his position on Israel? Bush certainly framed the campaign debate yesterday, it will be interesting to see how long this dialogue plays out.

Excuses, Excuses

Mary Kane — Fri, 16 May 2008 15:35:24 GMT

In Orange County, Calif., home foreclosures hit a new record during the first quarter of 2008. The housing crisis here and in other parts of California is part of everyday life, with foreclosure bus tours, blogs dedicated to the housing market's woes, and constant chatter about real estate.
But when it comes to the mortgage rescue plan in Congress, some in Orange County are saying "No thanks."

Even before the Senate tries to work out a compromise on a bill to use government money to insure $300 billion worth of home loans, the Orange County Register already has weighed in. In an editorial denouncing the entire notion of government help for borrowers, the paper urged President Bush to veto the bill. Any bill. No matter what how it ends up.

What's fascinating to me is one of the reasons why the paper is so opposed:

It has become fashionable to blame the mortgage crisis on "predatory" lenders who have aggressively pushed bigger mortgages than people can afford to pay onto hapless homebuyers. Insofar as some lending was fraudulent, appropriate legal remedies are readily available. It should be noted, however, that the government itself pressured lenders to make mortgage money available to people with marginal credit.

Actually, I think the editorial is particularly off track here. The trend goes the other way: It's more fashionable lately to cite "the government made me do it" theory as to how lenders got into trouble in the subprime market.

I would need the word length of a magazine article to go into all the reason why that argument is ridiculous. But let me point out just one: During much of the housing boom, interest rates were at historic lows. The only way to make some money in the mortgage market was to move into higher yield subprime loans. I can't imagine lenders crying and wringing their hands as the government forced them to seek profits in the housing market.

But then again, I don't live in Orange County, Calif. Apparently it's a different world there.

Housing Advocates Score a Big One

Mary Kane — Fri, 16 May 2008 13:31:01 GMT

I just got off the phone with David Berenbaum, and he is one happy housing advocate.

Berenbaum, executive vice president of the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, said Fannie Mae's decision to drop using zip codes as a basis for loan decisions is big victory in the fair housing fight. Fannie Mae announced the changes today. Berenbaum's group led the fight against the policy.

In an e-mail to his group's membership, Berenbaum wrote that "This is a very positive development and it is a direct result of our intervention."

Berenbaum said the hope among housing advocates is that Fannie Mae's move will encourage its competitor, Freddie Mac, and other lenders and private mortgage insurers to also make similar changes and discard using zip codes to determine loan prices.

Berenbaum's group contended that using zip codes where home values are declining as a basis for requiring higher downpayments or fees amounted to redlining. The policy changes, he said, mean Fannie will move to a "national pricing model" rather than using different underwriting standards for high foreclosure areas. This means borrowers in those areas won't necessarily pay higher downpayments, or in some case, higher fees, based solely on where they live.

Housing advocates don't have an issue when entire metropolitan areas, or even states, are tagged as declining markets, because then the risks and costs are shared fully among all borrowers. Redlining comes into play when lenders specify zip codes as declining and charge certain groups of borrowers more.

Fannie Mae's move may be just the beginning of lenders coming to terms with pricing issues raised by the housing crisis. The Federal Reserve and the Federal Trade Commission are considering requiring lenders to disclose any decision to base a mortgage loan price on something other than credit scores. Berenbaum said he's also supportive of that change.

Even with these developments, there are still battles ahead. Pricing mortgages has been a source of controversy for several years now. Berenbaum calls loan fees a less overt form of redlining, or "discrimination with a smile." Housing advocates who want to make sure a new form of redlining doesn't reappear as the mortgage market shakes out expect they'll be facing many more fights ahead.

But for today, at least, score one for Berenbaum's side.

Fannie May Alter Redlining Policy

Mary Kane — Fri, 16 May 2008 13:19:39 GMT

As we wrote yesterday, a policy by mortgage industry giant Fannie Mae to require higher downpayments and fees for borrowers in certain zip codes with declining house values raised charges of redlining. A powerful coalition of housing advocates and even lending industry groups such as the National Association of Realtors quickly challenged it.

It seems their efforts are paying off. Fannie Mae is expected to announce today that it will make changes to the policy, the Wall Street Journal reports.

Fannie apparently will no longer require higher downpayments for borrowers in certain zip codes. It also may allow for more flexibility, so if appraisers can prove that home values in certain neighborhoods are rising, then those communities won't be designated as declining markets - even if the metropolitan areas that surround them are experiencing price declines, the Journal said.

The move comes as Fannie Mae and the lending industry as a whole have been charging higher fees for some borrowers based on where they live, prompting charges of a new kind of redlining that will price out of the market first-time homebuyers and those with modest incomes.

There's no word in the Journal report about whether Fannie still will charger higher interest rates to those categories of borrowers. Some housing advocates had less of a problem with higher downpayments, saying that if they are combined with careful and accurate appraisals, they can be a legitimate way for lenders to make loans without taking on too much risk. But higher fees based simply on a borrower's neighborhood, they said, only would make it harder for some borrowers to pay their mortgages and would actually add to a loan's risk.

The fight over the policy shows how contentious lending may become as the housing market reacts to the credit crunch caused by the subprime market's collapse.

From the Journal:

The concessions from Fannie and Freddie illustrate the conflicting pressures that they are facing. Many critics say they are taking far too many risks, increasing the danger that taxpayers may end up having to bail them out.

But politicians and the housing industry are pushing them to do more to prop up the housing market.

Regardless, any changes to the policy represent a victory of sorts for fair housing advocates, who don't usually win battles this quickly.

Why Is Clement Out?

Matthew Blake — Thu, 15 May 2008 20:22:26 GMT

Paul Clement, the Bush administration's top litigator -- who many thought would replace Alberto Gonzales as Attorney General- is leaving after three years on the job as solicitor general. Clement represented the White House in 49 Supreme Court cases, which included arguing that military commissions, absent habeas corpus rights, are constitutional. A Justice Department spokesman told Reuters that Clement left to spend time with family.

Besides devotion to loved ones, why would Clement decide not to stick it out until the bitter end? His timing is a little odd, considering the Supreme Court is about to decide, again, whether military commissions are constitutional. It also comes when Congress has subpoenaed Justice Dept. officials to testify about the Guantanamo Bay procedures that Clement defended.

Beyond his most high-profile work defending the "war on terror," Clement fought the conservative fight on issues like withholding federal money from college's that ban military recruiters (school's do so on grounds that the military discriminates against gays).

Clement is not entirely without his contradictions, though. He created some hand-wringing by the right over his recent defense of D.C.'s ban on handguns. And hipper conservatives have taken to Clement for his fondness of dance punk band Franz Ferdinand.

Will Conyers Get Rove?

Matthew Blake — Thu, 15 May 2008 19:49:58 GMT

John Conyers, (D-Mi.) has been relentless in his efforts to bring top Bush administration figures before his House Judiciary Committee. The Politico's Ryan Grim reports that Conyers is now after Karl Rove. "We're closing in on Rove," Conyers was overhead saying this afternoon. "Someone's got to kick his ass."

Conyers then told Politico what he would do if Rove doesn't testify. "We'll hold him in contempt." Conyers said. "Either that or go have him arrested."

The Michigan Democrat mostly wants to grill Rove on the Justice Dept's prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Don Seigelman. But there are other questions Conyers has for Rove. "We want him for so many things," he told Politico. "It's hard to keep track."

Conyers recently got John Ashcroft, John Yoo, Doug Feith and David Addington to agree to testify June 26 about their respective roles in authorizing the administration's detainee interrogation policies.

Nuns v. Dow Chemical

Jefferson Morley — Thu, 15 May 2008 18:00:00 GMT

The Sisters of Mercy in Detroit agree with Suemedha Sood's piece earlier this week that Dow Chemical has cleaned up its image, not its practices. Michigan Messenger reports that the nuns, who own Dow stock, introduced a resolution at the company's annual shareholder meeting today, calling for a report on the "pace and effectiveness' of the company's efforts to clean up widespread dioxin contamination from its factory in central Michigan. The company's management opposes the resolution, saying it will report on dioxin in 2010. Meanwhile, dioxin levels in the local watershed has reached 1.6 million parts per trillion was found in the watershed. Anything over 90 parts per trillion is hazardous your health.

Raining on McCain's Parade

Jefferson Morley — Thu, 15 May 2008 17:30:00 GMT

Anti-Republican demonstrators will be allowed to march past the site of the GOP convention in St. Paul, Minnesota in September, police announced yesterday. "We believe we have struck that difficult balance that we've been looking for between free expression and safety and security," a police official said, according to Minnesota Monitor.

Denver police have yet to disclose any protest-related plans for the Democratic convention in late August, reports Colorado Confidential

Waxman and Berman Back Obama

Jeremy P. Jacobs — Thu, 15 May 2008 17:18:44 GMT

Two prominent House Democrats announced their support of Obama today: foreign affairs committee chair Howard Berman (D-Calif.) and oversight committee chair Henry Waxman (D-Calif.). Waxman stressed Obama's "experience, judgment, integrity and toughness" in his statement, while Berman said Obama has "laid out a foreign policy vision driven by principle and conviction." Here is Waxman's release.

I was just going through the list of unpledged superdelegates, picking out which are the big names left. Besides the obvious choices (Pelosi, Carter, Gore), Waxman and Berman were near the top of the list. I'm expecting Obama to continue rolling out supers, but saving a few for after Kentucky next week, where Clinton will likely win big again.

"I Will Not Be Eligible"

Spencer Ackerman — Thu, 15 May 2008 16:17:39 GMT

One last Goldsmith post and then you'll have to forgive me but I can't take any more of this. I'll have a wrap-up piece later today.

Goldsmith said his last dream was to go to college. But when he came home from Iraq, "I attempted suicide. I never deployed a second time. Because of that I received a general discharge. I lost my college benefits, the $40,000 promised me in the Montgomery GI Bill. I will not be eligible to receive. And currently there is a Senator in Congress -- excuse me -- currently running for president, who is fighting to kill our Webb GI bill. And I'm one of the soldiers who will never get that money."

Unnecessary Amputations At Army Hospitals?

Spencer Ackerman — Thu, 15 May 2008 16:11:24 GMT

Goldsmith just said something I've never heard of before, showing a photograph of his buddy to the Congressional Progressive Caucus:

"That man went through the same Stop-Loss as I. He almost lost his right leg. The only reason he didn't is because in Germany where they were going to send him, they messed up his paperwork and flew him home. He's now able to walk. But they were going to cut his leg off as a quick fix. And that is what they're doing in the hospitals of Germany to who knows how many hundreds of American veterans."

After the revelations of Walter Reed, should we be surprised, if this is true?

"That Dream Turned Into Nightmares"

Spencer Ackerman — Thu, 15 May 2008 16:02:33 GMT

These are the words of Kristofer Goldsmith, who said he dreamed his entire boyhood of joining the Army.

"That dream turned into nightmares. I joined the Army to kill people. I joined the Army to kill Iraqis, to kill Muslims. To kill people that were a skin tone other than mine and inhabiting the Middle East. On September 12, 2001, I remember standing up as a 16 year-old boy -- I was still in high school when this happened -- the day after September 11, and talking about how we should use biological weapons, or chemical weapons, on the entire Middle East, to make it so that religious land, the Holy Land, is not an issue that harms America.

"I want to state that I have since changed. I am no longer a racist. I am no longer filled with hatred like that. But that is what drove me, even harder, to join the Army and to fight in combat.

"I joined as a forward observer and trained to use artillery, some of the most destructive weapons that the Army has. When I deployed to Iraq in 2005, I was not authorized artillery because we had drawn a truce with Moqtada al-Sadr, leader of the Mahdi militia, and the prophet to some across all of Iraq, especially those in Sadr City."

Goldsmith asked for a slide to be presented to the members of Congress listening to him. As I'm on a train listening to streaming audio of the testimony, I don't know what it shows. He said it's of a photograph he took.

"That blue Arabic graffiti right there is on the side of a school somewhere in Sadr City. I didn't know until three days ago when I had a good friend of mine who is Iraqi translate it for me, but in 2005, an Iraqi spraypainted that. And it translates directly to, 'Welcome, America, to the Second Vietnam.' Vietnam and Iraq have been compared not only by Iraq Veterans Against The War and Vietnam Veterans Against The War, but by the very people in Iraq who Americans think are too ignorant to realize what's going on in the world. These are smart, educated people that are dying every day."

He continued to the next slide, which showed more graffiti this time in English. THE US AND ALLAWI ARE TERRORMEN.

"That is the feeling in Sadr City. They feel they have been let down by America and by their own government that George Bush's administration put in power.

"Before I go on I want to say that I do not blame you, as Congress-members, for not ending the war, as many Americans do. I do not blame the president for not ending the war. I blame the people of America and their apathy, because they are -- you are responsible for following what they say. And they have not done a good enough job to convince the rest of your peers -- namely Republicans -- to fight to bring our troops home and save lives in both America and Iraq."

IVAW Member To Refuse Deployment To Iraq

Spencer Ackerman — Thu, 15 May 2008 15:26:35 GMT

While the Winter Soldier hearing goes on, this just arrived in my inbox:

Member of Iraq Veterans Against the War to Publicly refuse to deploy to Iraq

Washington, DC – Today, immediately following Winter Soldier on the Hill, Iraq Veterans Against the War member Matthis Chiroux will publicly announce his refusal to report to Active Duty.

Chiroux will be making his statement in the Cannon House Office Building's Rotunda, located just inside the building's main entrance.

Sergeant Matthis Chiroux, 24, originally from Auburn, Alabama, has served in Germany, Japan, Afghanistan and the Philippines since his enlistment in the US Army in June 2002.

New at TWI

Laura McGann — Thu, 15 May 2008 15:25:32 GMT

Mary Kane has troubling news on the housing front: it appears new mortgage industry rules are a return to redlining.

The Traffic Control Point

Spencer Ackerman — Thu, 15 May 2008 15:22:34 GMT

Geoffrey Millard, a soldier with the New York National Guard, was a general's assistant in Iraq. He related a story he attended a briefing his boss about: a soldier at a traffic control point, faced with a speeding, oncoming car, "made a split-second decision" to fire "more than 200 rounds into the vehicle," killing its inhabitants. "He then watched as the mother, father and two children were carried from that car.

"That evening, as it was briefed to the general -- and I flipped the slides for that briefing -- Col. [William] Rochelle, from the 42nd Infantry Division, DISCOM [Division Support Command] commander -- and I have to apologize for a little vulgarity here, but I feel it's intricate for my testimony -- he turned in his chair to an entire division-level staff, and he said, and I quote, 'If these fucking Hajjis learned to drive, this shit wouldn't happen.'"

In January, Millard told me that story from the living room of his house in Petworth, which serves double duty as IVAW's D.C. headquarters. "I was set back by that," he told the Congressional Progressive Caucus today. "I expected for from high-ranking officers in a line unit. I expected a lot more."

Tall Afar and Detainees

Spencer Ackerman — Thu, 15 May 2008 15:05:15 GMT

Ewing began talking on detainees. He said 3rd ACR's commander, Col. H.R. McMaster, "went through great lengths, it seems, to ensure that detainees were not abused the way they had been [by] previous units." But that's "little consolation to those Iraqis whose relatives have been detained without good reason."

In one case, he and his fellow soldiers detained three men because "they had been running." Another Iraqi was injured in the foot by a gunshot wound. Ewing's soldiers questioned and detained four of the man's friends. The JAG attorney said there wasn't enough evidence to hold them "but we'll take care of it anyway." Ewing said that when he read the fine print of an incident report he was asked to sign, a staff sergeant who took the men in had falsely stated the men had confessed to attacking a U.S.-aligned tribe.

Et Tu, Tall Afar?

Spencer Ackerman — Thu, 15 May 2008 14:49:26 GMT

Scott Ewing is an Army scout who served with the 3rd Amored Cavalry Regiment in 2005 in the city of Tall Afar. To counterinsurgency advocates, 3rd ACR and Tall Afar are legends -- the brigade, commanded by H.R. McMaster and his executive officer Paul Yingling, that provided a template for Gen. Petraeus' population-protection strategy.

Before Congress, Ewing provided a dark counternarrative to 3rd ACR. During a two-house search, Ewing remembered, he entered a house to find soldiers from a mortar platoon holding six Iraqi men against a wall. Out in the driveway, "several middle-aged women" lay on the concrete "covered in blood." An Apache helicopter "had fired several high-explosive rounds into the front yard."

Ewing's comrades provided what medical care to the wounded they could. But, growing emotional, he recalled that some of the women were beyond treatment. "A little boy, about nine, a nine-year old boy," he said, "came up to me and pointed to his chest and there was a blood spot on it." He got the boy and some of the women to an aid station.

"This incident," he said, "illustrates the first serious difference between what I saw in Iraq and what is seen back home. There has been almost no explicit reporting by the mainstream media of civilian casualties caused by U.S. troops in Iraq. Anytime a suicide bomber kills civilians it is highly publicized. But from my personal experience in Tall Afar, the number of Iraqis killed or injured by our forces far outnumbered those killed by insurgents or suicide bombers."

Update: The Washington Post reports today that McMaster will finally receive his long-delayed/awaited promotion to brigadier general.

"Lemieux, I Think Your Views On This War Are Affecting Your Reports."

Spencer Ackerman — Thu, 15 May 2008 14:28:02 GMT

Sgt. Lemieux related an incident to Congress that I don't recall him saying at Winter Soldier in March, though my memory could be faulty and I don't have my March notebook on-hand. He said that in one awful early 2006 day in Tamim, U.S. Marines responded to minimal sniper fire with massive amounts of ammunition. A group of Marines received "four rounds of poorly-aimed enemy fire," and returned it with "thousands of rounds" of grenade, machine gun and rocket fire "all into an area of Tamim known to be owned and occupied by local civilians."

Lemieux conducted the after-action investigation. When he showed an account to his chain of command matching the description he just gave to Congress, Lima Company's executive officer told him, "Lemieux, I think your views on this war are affecting your reports." After arguing with the Lemieux, who stood by his investigation, the officer said, "We can't send a report to battalion telling them we expended all this ammunition in response to four rounds." Then the officer falsified the report "at my intelligence computer," Lemieux testified.