The Copenhagen Climate Talks Commence

Here's the thing about the Copenhagen summit and Kyoto. The deadline for action isn't because the science says that we must act immediately, but because the Kyoto Accord expires in 2012, so the real timeframe is political, not science related. The political will is "there" to get something done.

The Times of India had an interesting comment to that effect:

"Time is up," de Boer said. "Over the next two weeks nations have to deliver".

The first week of the conference will focus on the text of a draft treaty. Major decisions may await arrival of the environment ministers next week and the heads of state in the final days of the meet, which ends on December 18.

As the first commitment period for greenhouse gas emissions reductions, regulated by the Kyoto Protocol, would expire in 2012, the international community would endeavour to map out a plan for binding emissions cuts for the second commitment period from 2012 to 2020 at Copenhagen.

Delegates must craft a blueprint for tackling manmade "greenhouse" gases and put together a funding mechanism for helping poor nations fight climate change.

Now, what exactly did Kyoto accomplish? Emissions grew at an astounding clip. Here's what actually happened:

Country Change in greenhouse gas
Emissions (1992-2007)
India +103%
China +150%
United States +20%
Russian Federation -20%
Japan +11%
Worldwide Total +38%

That includes the period covered by Kyoto. Europe fell well short of the targets, and even then, their economic growth (lack thereof) contributed to the declines. Strongly growing economies, like China and India, saw tremendous growth in emissions. Far from controlling or limiting emissions, the emissions surged.

That precedent bodes poorly on any kind of deal in Copenhagen, which is primarily political in nature. The science is actually besides the point here; just as surely as it was in the Kyoto talks. This is about the politics of wealth and the distribution (redistribution) of wealth.

NJ Considers Gay Marriage Legislation

With just a few weeks in Gov. Jon Corzine's term remaining, proponents for a gay marriage bill have little time to act before his successor, Chris Christie takes office. Christie is on the record as opposing the measure and vowed to veto the bill if he crosses his desk. Corzine would sign it into law.

However, it is all but certain that the legislation would make it to the governor's desk. Democrats and Republicans oppose the legislation, including Democrat Paul Sarlo, who heads the Senate Judiciary Committee. The bill has to make it out of committee before the full Senate can vote on the measure.

Though similar legislation died in New York’s senate last week, proponents of gay marriage here think they still have a fighting chance and are focusing their lobbying efforts on senators they believe to be undecided about the issue.

Senate President Richard Codey (D-Essex) said lobbyists have been burning up the phone lines.

"Both sides are working furiously. Legislative offices are extremely busy with phone calls," he said. "Lobbying and lobbying and lobbying."

Advocates for same sex marriage see this as a last stand. In just over a month, Gov.-elect Chris Christie will take office. He has made it clear he will veto any gay marriage legislation that comes to his desk. However, Gov. Jon Corzine says he is prepared to sign it.

Sen. Paul Sarlo (D-Bergen), chair of the judiciary committee, said he would be voting against the legislation (S1967/2978), but he expects it to pass by a narrow margin.

"I’ve fulfilled my commitment and now my next challenge is to run a fair and open hearing. I am not lobbying anybody for their vote. I advise the members to vote their conscience," he said.

Codey said the issue won’t be decided through backroom deals.

"This isn’t about making deals," he said. "This is about your conscience."

I give the gay marriage proposal a 50/50 chance of being approved in the Senate. It will probably get voted out of committee, where people might vote to allow everyone to register their votes, rather than kill it in committee.

The full text of the bill is here. The key provision is as follows:

3. (New section) “Marriage” means the legally recognized union of two consenting persons in a committed relationship. Whenever the term “marriage” occurs or the term “man,” “woman,” “husband” or “wife” occurs in the context of marriage or any reference is made thereto in any law, statute, rule, regulation or order, the same shall be deemed to mean or refer to the union of two persons pursuant to this amendatory and supplementary act.

4. (New section) It is the intent of the Legislature that this amendatory and supplementary act be interpreted consistently with the guarantees of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and of Article I, paragraph 4 of the New Jersey Constitution.

Marriage would no longer be defined strictly as between a man and woman, but rather between two consenting adults. It would supersede the civil union legislation passed several years ago, and other legislative changes would incorporate the new definition into relevant statutes.

The Rebuilding of Ground Zero, Part 89

A significant portion of the steel being used at Ground Zero, including the transit hub, 1WTC (Freedom Tower) and 4WTC, comes from a facility in South Plainfield, New Jersey:

NJ steel mill is a large contributor to World Trade Center rebuilding

On My Nightstand: Conquering the Sky

Conquering the Sky, The Secret Flights of the Wright Brothers at Kitty Hawk, by Larry Tise, is an interesting read about the early history of powered flight and the journalistic standards of the day.

Much of the insight isn't necessarily about the flights by the Wright Brothers during May 1908, when they proved that their flight control systems worked and that they could carry passengers, but how the media circus developed based on the hearsay evidence of those who didn't even witness the reports. Moreover, it shows the lengths to which newspapers went to create news and relied upon wildly inaccurate reports without even so much as a whisper of veracity.

What we do know is that the Wright Brothers were secretive about their efforts at Kitty Hawk in 1908, and that they were intent not on setting records there, but to confirm that their flight systems worked as intended. It was only incidental that one of their flights - a two-person flight - was observed by reporters, confirming that the Wright Brothers had mastered the problem of flight.

When Is a Timetable Not a Timetable?

The news that the Obama Administration is taking to the airwaves to clarify and extend an Afghan strategy that minimizes and deemphasizes an actual deadline for removing troops isn't going to leave many of his supporters happy.

In a flurry of coordinated television interviews by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and other top administration officials, they said that any troop pullout beginning in July 2011 would be slow and that the Americans would only then be starting to transfer security responsibilities to Afghan forces under Mr. Obama’s new plan.

The television appearances by the senior members of Mr. Obama’s war council appeared to be part of a focused and determined effort to ease concerns about the president’s emphasis on setting a date for reducing America’s presence in Afghanistan after more than eight years of war.

“We have strategic interests in South Asia that should not be measured in terms of finite times,” said Gen. James L. Jones, the president’s national security adviser, speaking on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “We’re going to be in the region for a long time.”

Echoing General Jones, Mr. Gates played down the significance of the July 2011 target date and indicated that the United States might withdraw only a small number of troops at that time.

“There isn’t a deadline,” Mr. Gates said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “What we have is a specific date on which we will begin transferring responsibility for security district by district, province by province in Afghanistan, to the Afghans.”

It's actually the right thing for President Obama to have done (clarifying that the deadline wasn't a hard and fast date but a guideline. He should never have mentioned a specific date, but now that a date was released, the Administration is working overtime to focus on the weasel words he used in his speech to the cadets at West Point.

What Happens When the Money Runs Out

A government health care program to provide breast cancer screening for women in California has closed to new patients because the funding has run dry.

The "unprecedented fiscal challenges" claimed another victim this week as health officials decided to discontinue a cigarette tax-funded program that pays for breast cancer screenings for low-income women.

Mandatory changes were required this week by California Department of Public Health to the division, Every Woman Counts. The specialized division provides a cancer detection program for California's medically underserved women by giving them access to screening and diagnostic services for breast and cervical cancer.

The two biggest changes to the program according to a release are:

* They will stop paying for breast cancer screening for women under 50.

* They will stop enrolling all new patients for breast cancer screening until July 1.

Cigarette tax funding was supposed to provide a funding mechanism for health care programs around the nation, but higher taxes and fees on cigarettes combined with fewer smokers and raiding the tobacco settlement funds have meant that revenues have fallen or have already been committed to use elsewhere and aren't available to fund these kinds of programs. That means states have to look elsewhere, or they have to shutter useful health care programs such as this.

This should also serve as a warning for the national health care debate, where Democrats are busy trying to claim that a 10-year budget under the health care changes they propose will somehow manage to be deficit neutral even as they are taking 10 years of tax revenues to pay for seven years of spending on the new system.

That is unsustainable in any form since once you're 10 years into the tax revenues, those revenues will not be able to keep up with the costs for the program and will balloon the deficit or force a restriction on the spending - reducing access to health care in order to reduce costs.

The Dollars and Sense of Emission Reductions

There are lots of promises and proposals being made to reduce emissions by x percent in order to combat global warming. Let's set aside the science on this and talk dollars and sense.

World leaders and experts are meeting in Copenhagen, Denmark to discuss proposals to reduce carbon emissions. In particular, President Obama is looking to reduce emissions by 17% by 2020 and 83% by 2050.

At the international climate meetings in Copenhagen next month, Mr. Obama will tell the delegates that the United States intends to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions “in the range of” 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050, officials said.

The figures reflect targets specified by legislation that passed the House in June but is stalled in the Senate. Congress has never enacted legislation that includes firm emissions limits or ratified an international global warming agreement with binding targets.

Mr. Obama will travel to the United Nations talks to deliver the promise in hopes of spurring significant progress there. He will appear Dec. 9, near the beginning of the 12-day session, on his way to accept the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo on Dec. 10, officials said.

By making the pledge in an international forum, Mr. Obama is laying a bet that Congress will complete action on a climate bill next year and will be prepared to ratify an international agreement based on the commitment.

This graph shows visually what the President proposes doing, all while China and India continue growing. Moreover, the total increase in emissions (which that graph doesn't show), continues rising particularly if China and/or India do not sign on to any agreement.

The massive economic slowdown and recession have reduced carbon emissions significantly, but with the eventual end of the recession, economic growth will resume, and so will the demand for energy and production of goods and services that can and do produce carbon dioxide and other emissions.

This graph shows carbon emissions since the 1700s, and an 80% reduction in current US emissions would require a sea-change in how the nation produces power and transports goods, or else we'd be talking about a radical reduction in the quality of life. Since so much of what we take for granted in our current standard of living owes itself to power generation (which is primarily from fossil fuels) to power our economy, it would require a massive switch to nuclear power and alternative energy sources to reduce carbon emissions by the levels suggested by the President.

Moreover, it would require a massive change in how people view nuclear power and allow for the construction of dozens of new nuclear power plants in the country. Such efforts are not likely given the NIMBY attitudes across the country and the high start-up costs for a nuclear power plant as compared to coal or gas fired plants.

So, until we dedicate ourselves to building nuclear power plants, we should not expect any action towards the reduction of emissions either domestically or worldwide.

AP: Terrorists Now Headlined As Gangsters

The AP reports that Pakistani police engaged a bunch of terrorists and killed one and captured five others, all while seizing a bunch of suicide vests, grenades, guns, and ammunition. So, how does the AP headline this report?

Pakistani police arrest gang accused in bombing.

Police said the commandos encountered fierce resistance when they stormed the compound in the village of Kaka Khel near Peshawar, the largest city in the area and the main gateway to the Afghan border region where many al-Qaida and Taliban insurgents are based.

Militants have carried out a wave of deadly attacks in and around Peshawar in apparent retaliation for an army offensive in the tribal area of South Waziristan.

Three suicide jackets as well as a number of bombs, grenades, rocket-propelled grenades and other weapons were seized from the compound, regional police Chief Liaquat Ali Khan said.

He said one suspect was killed and five others arrested following a gunbattle that lasted more than two hours. A search operation for more militants continued in the area, some 30 miles (50 kilometers) east of Peshawar.

The detained are suspected of involvement in recent bombings and other attacks not only in Peshawar but in Islamabad and its sister city of Rawalpindi, Khan said, declining to be more specific.

In the latest major attack, a team of gunmen and suicide bombers struck a mosque Friday in Rawalpindi, killing 37 people, including several senior army officers.

These aren't mere gangsters, but terrorists who are seeking to undermine the Pakistani government and pushing an Islamist agenda. They want autonomy in the frontier provinces and are aligned with the Taliban in the NWFP and Waziristan to establish and maintain safe havens there for the Taliban and their al Qaeda affiliates. The terrorists continue their war against the Pakistani government and are using an agreement between certain Taliban groups and the government to spread their ideology and operate against the government forces in the region.

The Depressingly High Costs Of Cancer Medications

The New York Times reports that a newly approved cancer medication that may be able to marginally improve the quality of life for those afflicted with a certain form of cancer costs $30,000 a month.

The price of the new drug, called Folotyn, is at least triple that of other drugs that critics have said are too expensive for the benefits they offer to patients. The colon cancer drug Erbitux, for instance, costs $10,000 a month and the drug Avastin about $8,800 when used to treat lung cancer. The price of Folotyn “seems way higher than I heard of before,” Robert L. Erwin, president of the Marti Nelson Cancer Foundation, a patient advocacy group. “I can’t imagine there not being a backlash against the pricing.”

Drug makers in general have been raising prices sharply in advance of the possible passage of health care overhaul legislation, according to various studies. But the price of cancer drugs has been an issue for several years.

Critics, including many oncologists, say that patients and the health system cannot afford to pay huge prices for drugs that, on average, provide only a few extra months of life at best.

And Folotyn has not even been shown to prolong lives — only to shrink tumors. The drug was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in late September as a treatment for peripheral T-cell lymphoma, a rare and usually aggressive blood cancer that strikes an estimated 5,600 Americans each year. It is available for sale, but its manufacturer, Allos Therapeutics, does not plan to start actively promoting it until January.

A company that seeks to produce a medicine has a limited time in which to recoup the costs for those drugs under existing patent law. If they can't recoup the costs, they can't turn around and engage in further research.

Doctors and patients have to decide whether a drug is cost-effective in their individual cases. That's regardless of the actual cost - whether it's a few hundred bucks or tens of thousands for the course of treatment. But, that's a decision to be made by the patient and doctor and whether they want to incur the costs when a drug is uncertain to make a long term difference.

There's no real way around the high cost of these kinds of drugs, unless the government is going to step in and demand the costs be dropped - and subsidize the costs, which will ultimately result in higher costs spread among many other people.

As it is, the drug manufacturer is providing co-payment assistance and giving the drug free to uninsured patients who cannot pay for it.

If the government steps in to purposefully reduce drug costs by limiting profits and/or the prices charged to patients, the result will likely be the slowdown in research and development of new and improved medications and drugs to fight rare diseases that have a limited target population. Drug companies aren't going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars if they can't recoup that investment.

Photo of the Day

 

Threading the Needle on the Needles highway in South Dakota, taken using my Canon Rebel XTi with the Tamron 28-300mm XR Di VC (image stabilizer).

White House Social Secretary Regularly Allowed Party Crashers

This is the kind of action that deserves an investigation. Moreover, Desiree Rogers should be fired because she violated protocol and security in the process of allowing party crashers to attend events without invitations.

There's a reason that there are invitations and Secret Service checks on those who attend events with a President. Rogers' admissions show a reckless disregard for the President's security.

Desiree Rogers claimed in an interview with the trade magazine BizBash at the Creative Coalition's annual meeting in June that she had added extra tables and benches at every event to accommodate uninvited guests.

"Lots of people just come anyways," she said. "They won't take no for an answer. Finally, I just said, 'All right, come on in. It's no use kicking you out.' "

But an administration official yesterday insisted that Rogers "was clearly making a tongue-in-cheek comment about White House staff, already cleared to be on the complex," not about the general public.

What else is the White House going to say? They don't want to admit that Rogers screwed up, so they'd rather make a joke of it?

Photo of the Day

Mount Rushmore National Monument, taken using my Canon Rebel XTi with the Tamron 28-300mm XR Di VC (image stabilizer).

Jury Deadlocked In Hal Turner Case

The jury is deadlocked after just a couple hours of deliberation of the charges against Hal Turner. He's accused of threatening three federal judges through his radio program and online presence:

U.S. District Court Judge Donald Walter ordered the jury to return Monday morning to resume deliberations on whether Turner, 47, broke the law against threatening judges when he wrote on his blog last June that three federal appeals court judges “deserved to be killed” for ruling in favor of a gun control ordinance.

If convicted, Turner, who built an audience in recent years of neo-Nazis and white supremacists with his extreme right-wing radio and blog tirades, could be sentenced to 10 years in prison.

The central issue in the case is whether Turner’s words alone constitute an illegal threat.

Prosecutors contend that Turner’s words were aimed to “impede,” “intimidate” and “retaliate” against the federal judges – all elements of a threat, they say. But Turner’s defense lawyers say Turner’s statement on his blog was merely his opinion as a shock jock and therefore protected as free speech under the First Amendment.

Monserrate Gets Probation In Assault Rap

There will be no jail time for New York State Senator Hiram Monserrate, a Democrat, who was convicted of assaulting his girlfriend. The assault was captured in part on video. However, instead of jail time, he'll be getting probation.

State Sen. Hiram Monserrate was sentenced to three years probation for dragging his bleeding girlfriend through his apartment building lobby in a violent scene caught on security cameras.

The sentencing Friday also included 250 hours of community service and 52 weeks of domestic abuse counseling. An order of protection was continued.

Third-degree reckless assault, a misdemeanor, could have resulted in up to a year behind bars.

His girlfriend was in court for the sentencing.

The Queens Supreme Court Judge William M. Erlbaum had stern words for both Monserrate and his girlfriend, Karla Giraldo.

"She's not on a leash," he told Monserrate. "She doesn't need your permission for anything. Curb your anger, curb your anger."

Erlbaum also said that the "legislature has in its chamber a flawed human being. Perhaps there are others."

For Giraldo, he said, "I hope the time will come with Karla Giraldo will have the self respect to stop acting like a slave."

It's a slap on the wrist, and the judge's "stern" words are little comfort.

Portal Bridge Problems Create Delays For NJ Transit and Amtrak

If you've ever had to rely on NJ Transit or Amtrak along the Northeast Corridor, the Portal Bridge across the Hackensack River is the enemy of the schedule makers.

The decrepit bridge is responsible for more than its share of delays in the network, and today is no exception. Delays of up to an hour are being reported because the bridge was stuck in the upright position after letting river traffic through, and that was followed by an overhead wire problem and/or track problem limiting traffic.

The bridge was built in 1910 by the Pennsylvania Railroad, and is owned and operated by Amtrak. NJ Transit trains operate over the tracks.

The bridge is scheduled to start in 2011 and be finished five years after that at a cost of $1.34 billion. The current movable two-track configuration will be replaced by two separate fixed span bridges. One three-track bridge will to the north of the existing span, and a two-track bridge will be to the South. The new spans will allow for higher speeds throughout the vicinity of the span; currently they are limited to 60mph, but adjacent sections can see speeds of up to 90mph.

Replacing this bridge is a priority in improving the reliability and speed along the Northeast Corridor.

Colorado On Cusp Of Approving First New Uranium Mill Since Cold War

With all of the focus on global warming/climate change and the need to find reliable energy sources that can produce power in sufficient quantities to meet existing and predicted demand, nuclear power is seeing something of a resurgence. Some countries, like China, are looking at nuclear power in a serious way and are in the midst of acquiring sources for uranium to power all the power plants they expect to build in the coming decade.

The US is also looking at nuclear power, but opposition remains steadfast. In Colorado, a private corporation is one permit away from being able to break ground on the first new uranium mill since the Cold War. It would produce uranium for power plants the world over, and given that prices for uranium per pound are currently $46 and expected to rise to over $70 within a few years, it's a good bet.

There are four mills currently in the US, although one is not actively producing uranium because of the recovery costs.

I've detailed some of the issues in the past and have included two books on the subject in my reading lists, Uranium: War, Energy and the Rock That Shaped the World and Atomic Awakening.

Yet, we've got noted experts like Daryl Hannah opposed to a power source that would produce zero emissions and would be capable of leading to a revolution in powering our national economy.

The US remains the world's largest consumer of uranium, while Russia is the largest producer.

Gay Marriage Proposal To Be Considered By NJ Senate

Let's see if this has any more luck with a gay marriage proposal.

"On Monday in the Judiciary Committee, we're going to vote on marriage equality," Lesniak (D-Union) said, while making the announcement to a crowd of gay marriage supporters on the Statehouse steps today.

"On Thursday (Dec. 10) the full Senate is going to vote on marriage equality," said Lesniak, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. "And God be willing, we'll have 21 votes."

Democratic officials previously said they would not put the legislation to a vote unless they had the support needed to pass it.

About 650 people came here today in support of the bill's passage. At least a dozen same-sex marriage opponents, mainly a group of Orthodox Jews from Lakewood, held a counter protest at the Statehouse.

If the bill passes the legislature, it must go to the governor for signature. Outgoing Governor Corzine said he would sign the bill, while incoming Governor Christie said he would veto the measure.

The New York proposal that died a surprising death by a wide margin in the New York State Senate. That proposal died a bipartisan death as eight Democrats sided with 30 Republicans to kill the bill.

Still, quite a few top tier Democrats have come out in support of the gay marriage bill, including Cory Booker of Newark.

Swiss Politician Calls For Ban On Separate Religious Cemeteries

On the heels of the Swiss referendum pushed by right wing groups to ban the construction of new minarets, a Swiss politician is now proposing a ban on the construction of new Jewish and Muslim cemeteries.

A mainstream Swiss political leader is calling for a ban on separate Muslim and Jewish cemeteries.

Christophe Darbellay, president of the Christian Democratic People's Party of Switzerland, made the statement in a television interview Tuesday, two days after Swiss voters passed an initiative to ban minarets.

The anti-minaret initiative came from the opposition ultra-conservative Swiss People's Party and other right-wing political organizations. Critics say Darbellay is starting a "crusade" to attract voters by proposing similarly xenophobic measures.

Mainstream politicians and religious leaders across Europe have reacted with dismay to the anti-minaret vote.

According to the Swiss online daily Tagesanzeiger, Darbellay also wants to ban the wearing of burkas, head-to-toe veils worn by some fundamentalist Muslim women.

Darbellay reportedly said that existing cemeteries would not be affected by a ban, but that there should be no separate cemeteries in the future.

Jewish burial practices are well established and preventing further Jewish cemeteries to be created would violate the free exercise of the religious practices of Jews. But, as we've seen, European concepts of free speech and religious freedoms are quite different from the American concepts, which most Americans take for granted.

UPDATE:
Jews make up 0.3% of the population of the country - or about 20,000 citizens. The Swiss have regularly restricted ritual slaughter of meat according to Jewish practices (kashrut) since the 1800s. They prevent the practice inside the country, although they allow koshered meat to be imported since the 1970s.

Fallout Continues From WH Party Crashers

The Secret Service has already acknowledged that they made mistakes in allowing Tareq and Michaele Salahi to enter the State Dinner hosted at the White House by President Obama in honor of the Indian Prime Minister.

But, that's not the end of the security and protocol breach. It appears that the White House staff responsible for the invitation list weren't where they were supposed to be at the time to determine whether the Salahis should be denied access. That would be Desiree Rogers and her staff.

Unlike at past state dinners, Rogers assigned no White House aides to vet guests before they went through security. Just as unusual, she was named as an invited guest rather than a staffer.

"I never sat down at a state dinner because I was always too busy taking care of what needed to be taken care of," Maria Downs, social secretary during President Gerald Ford's administration, told The Post.

"You are there all through the dinner, mingling with the guests, taking care of their needs, but you weren't a guest."

Rogers declined the committee's invitation "based on separation of powers," said Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs.

The move prompted immediate condemnation from Congress.

"It's a terrible decision by the White House. They are obviously stonewalling. You have to conclude there is something to hide," said Rep. Peter King (R-LI), the committee member who asked Rogers to testify.

Also declining the Committee's invitation are the Salahis. A statement issued last night by their publicist said, "Having providing all relevant information to Representatives King and [Chairman Bennie] Thompson [D-Miss], there is nothing further that they can do to assist Congress in its inquiry . . . They therefore respectfully decline to testify."

The statement adds that before the Salahis were admitted to the dinner, they presented their passports to "three different Secret Service Agents at various White House checkpoints."

Thompson later threatened to subpoena the pair.

Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan is expected to appear.

Rogers broke protocol, especially for a freshman social secretary, when she seated herself as a guest at the dinner. Gibbs refused to say if she had invited herself or was a guest of the Obamas.

This whole mess reeks of incompetence and cronyism. And at the heart of the matter isn't just garden variety scandal, but one that affects the very security around the President of the United States. This is the kind of security breach that could have led to assassination attempts or other criminal acts. That the gate crashers were merely reality-show fame-whores is small consolation.

In fact, it is a reminder of the problems facing the White House Protocol Office, which provided Obama-centric items to various dignitaries, including the Queen of England.

That Gibbs and the White House claimed executive privilege to avoid testifying before Congress on a security issue affecting the White House and the President itself is also surprising; even they must know how bad things would look especially once Congress started looking deeper into the mess.

The Sahalis claim no wrongdoing and that they broke no laws and aren't likely to willingly testify before Congress either.

UPDATE:
The Washington Post is reporting that the agents at the state dinner have been placed on administrative leave.

New York Senate Rejects Gay Marriage

Even as New York is facing a monumental budget crisis, the legislature still managed to find the time to consider gay marriage legislation. Proponents figured that they had a shot of passage, but the State Senate surprised everyone with a resounding defeat of the measure.

It wasn't even close.

The 38-to-24 vote startled proponents of the bill and signaled that political momentum, at least right now, had shifted against same-sex marriage, even in heavily Democratic New York. It followed more than a year of lobbying by gay rights organizations, who steered close to $1 million into New York legislative races to boost support for the measure.

Senators who voted against the measure said the public was gripped by economic anxiety and remained uneasy about changing the state’s definition of marriage.

“Certainly this is an emotional issue and an important issue for many New Yorkers,” said Senator Tom Libous, the deputy Republican leader. “I just don’t think the majority care too much about it at this time because they’re out of work, they want to see the state reduce spending, and they are having a hard time making ends meet. And I don’t mean to sound callous, but that’s true.”

The defeat, which followed a stirring, tearful and at times very personal debate, all but ensures that the issue is dead in New York until at least 2011, when a new Legislature will be installed.

Since 2003, seven states, including three that border New York, have legalized same-sex marriage. But in two of the seven — California last year and Maine last month — statewide referendums have restricted marriage to straight couples, prohibiting gay nuptials. Pollsters say that while support generally is building for same-sex marriage, especially as the electorate ages, voters resist when they fear the issue is being pushed too fast.

So, how exactly did this measure fall in the Senate?

Here's the full roll call. Eight Democrats, Ruben Diaz Sr., Joseph Addabbo, Shirley Huntley, Darrel Aubertine, Carl Kruger, Hiram Monserrate, George Onorato and William Stachowski voted against the measure, along with all 30 Republicans.

This pretty much assures that the gay marriage issue will not come up until a new legislature is seated in 2011.

Just When Huckabee's Political Problems Couldn't Get Worse

It does. First, the head of his political action committee called it quits over the revelations surrounding his clemency.

The Arkansas coordinator for Mike Huckabee’s political action committee resigned Tuesday, citing the former Arkansas governor’s decision nine years ago to grant clemency to Maurice Clemmons, the man suspected of murdering four police officers in Washington state.

Jason Tolbert, who runs a conservative blog, served as Arkansas state coordinator for HuckPAC in a volunteer capacity.

If anyone had dug a little deeper, they would have heard about the clemency issues even before Clemmons. Tolbert had to overlook those issues, including Wayne DuMond, when he took the job. It's only after Clemmons that he bails? Better late than never, I guess.

Now, the New York Times reveals a series of letters between prosecutors and Huckabee's office, and they show just how unserious Huckabee was about clemency issues.

One prosecutor wrote to Huckabee concerned over whether Huckabee was seriously considering parole board recommendations or independently coming to decisions. The response from Huckabee: he laughed out loud and then suggested that the prosecutor cut back on the caffeine.

Robert Herzfeld, then the prosecuting attorney of Saline County, wrote a letter to Governor Huckabee in January 2004, saying his policy on clemency was “fatally flawed” and suggesting that he should announce specific reasons for granting clemency. Mr. Huckabee’s chief aide on clemency wrote back: “The governor read your letter and laughed out loud. He wanted me to respond to you. I wish you success as you cut down on your caffeine consumption.”

The full documents are here.

NIH Approves New Embryonic Stem Cell Lines For Research

President Obama vastly expanded the embryonic stem cell research in March 2009, and the NIH has approved new embryonic stem cell lines created as a result of that decision.

Two of the newly approved 13 lines were derived by Dr. Brivanlou with private financing. The rest were prepared by Dr. George Daley of Children’s Hospital, Boston.

Dr. Daley said that private financing had been drying up and that he was eager to start research on the now-approved cell lines with the help of his federal grant money.

The director of the health agency, Dr. Francis S. Collins, said he believed most researchers would be satisfied with the outcome, even though they were still barred from deriving the cells themselves. “I’m not sure everyone is interested in deriving their own cell lines as long as they can get lines from others,” Dr. Collins said.

Researchers’ interest in human embryonic stem cells has abated since the discovery in 2007 by the Japanese biologist Dr. Shinya Yamanaka that the mature cells of the body can be reprogrammed to the embryonic state.

These induced embryonic cells are highly similar to the real thing but may not be exactly the same. One reason is that the mature cell may perceive the forced walk-back to embryonic state as unauthorized and switch on its anticancer defenses.

Bear in mind that embryonic stem cell research first received federal funding under the Bush Administration, who limited it to certain lines then in existence because of concerns over the ethics and morality of using such tissue and cells (particularly in how they were procured). It was a compromise, but one that the right wing couldn't stand. This is an expansion of a program started under the Bush Administration and enacted August 9, 2001 and a policy expanding stem cell research from 2007. The Obama Administration repealed those decisions March 9, 2009, replacing it with his own policy that is more expansive. This is the first fruit borne from that decision.

However, in the intervening years between President Bush's initial decision and today, researchers have found that adult stem cells can be programmed to act like embryonic stem cells, eliminating the moral and ethical quandary that set President Bush to limit embryonic stem cell research in the first place.

NYC ACORN Supervisor Busted For Fraud

Should it surprise anyone that yet another ACORN worker is in hot water? Verizon has a small business incentive program for those who use the company's phone services. Donnett Davis signed ACORN up for the corporate rewards program using 10-20 phone lines, but kept the rewards in her own name. She also somehow managed to include 9,000 Department of Education phone lines in her rewards account, allowing the rewards to really add up. In all, she amassed $500,000 in merchandise through a corporate rewards program.

All of the alleged fraud took place while Donnett Davis was working for ACORN, and it continued while she was working for the Department of Education as a parent coordinator for the Acorn High School for Social Justice (which was a school founded as a partnership between the Department and ACORN.

ACORN itself claims that it engaged in no wrong doing.

I see it as yet another sign of the incompetent mismanagement by the organization and an ongoing failure in the character and judgment of those who work on the organization's behalf. It is an ongoing symptom of the moral and ethical flexibility repeatedly uncovered in even cursory examinations of the organization.

Davis should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, along with anyone else who aided her in the efforts to defraud Verizon's rewards program. She used the names of seven present and former ACORN workers to perpetrate her fraud.

The Department of Education isn't even eligible for the rewards program, which is meant for small business. Davis likely had help in securing the fraudulent rewards.

The Policy Implications of Obama's Afghan Strategy

President Obama has called for an increase in troop strength by 30,000 troops, which is a move that is a long time coming and should be applauded. He's doing so despite national sentiment against the troop increase. That's a courageous decision to make, especially in the face of a lack of support from his fellow Democrats.

Where I find serious fault with the President is his need to set an end date. It completely undermines the counterinsurgency mission contemplated for those very troops.

The speech last night was designed for two specific constituencies (his party base, and Americans in general), but there were other interested parties, including the very enemies we face in Afghanistan.

The Taliban and al Qaeda just heard that they've got to just wait out the US and then they're right back in business.

The Afghans hear that they've got to make improvements or else they lose their support/ backing (and to whom will they turn? China? Pakistan? Taliban?). If we're supposed to fight a counterinsurgency campaign, getting the Afghan people to trust us with their long term security, setting an end date undermines that very concept. Why should the Afghan people - the majority of whom just want to be left alone - want to assist the US and NATO in rooting out the Taliban if we're going to leave in just a few short months (18 months is the blink of an eye in region that has known nothing but war and conflict for three decades), and allows the Taliban to come creeping back in? That singular question is unanswered in all this, even with the President's attempt to claim that this is designed to put pressure on the Afghan government to straighten up and fly right.

The US Democrats hear that they get their timetables and mutter and complain that they've got to put up with troop surge, but there's enough weasel words to get them to go along with it.

Republicans hear that they've got the troop increase but mutter that they've got to deal with timetables and there's enough weasel words to get them to go along with it.

Democrats and GOPers are critical for funding the Afghan operation. The Taliban and al Qaeda will try to work all this to their advantage. The Afghans will do what they've been doing - trying to survive and will side with whoever gives them the best chance for the long run.

The setting of a timeline is counterproductive. There's no incentive for the Pakistanis, Afghans, or al Qaeda/Taliban to change their behavior one bit based on the President's speech precisely because of the timelines.

The President could have achieved the same results without putting a specific date in play. After all, once that date is in play, it becomes a political decision (even more than it already is - but setting a specific date can be an albatross for the 2010/2012 election cycles). Yet, the President must have felt it necessary politically to include an end-date because his party is not fully supportive of the Afghan surge.

You can work with benchmarks - the more you achieve, the closer you can get to a point where you draw down troops. It's the strategy used by the Bush Administration in defining the Iraqi surge and the eventual drawdown of troops there.

The faster you reach the benchmarks, the faster troops come home - and when you put together the benchmarks, it can resemble something like victory (a word completely absent from the President's speech last night).

It can mean securing the border and setting up a process by which border crossings are not tolerated - and denies Taliban/al Qaeda safe havens. It can mean setting up a government that simultaneously denies warlords the ability to constitute a threat to a functional government, but brings them into a political process. It can mean reducing reliance on opium, but gives people hope for an economic opportunity. It can mean the Afghan government building some roads and infrastructure that can be a tangible proof for the Afghan people that the Afghan government functions.

By setting specific dates, even with the weasel words, people will still take away the setting of a deadline; everyone will focus on the date, especially our enemies who will use those dates to help determine their own course of action to outlast the US commitment to defeating al Qaeda and their Taliban allies.

Also among the issues is how exactly are the increased troops going to get to Afghanistan, let alone resupplied. Supply lines in Pakistan remain troublesome. We've had to deal with the Russians every step of the way in the -stans (including our base in Kyrygstan, and have found our supply lines crimped several times in the past year (including bombings of our supply lines through Pakistan). With a massive troop surge, we're going to have that many more troops pushing into the region relying on the same supply lines. Airlifting can do only so much, so this has to be done knowing that we've got the secured supply lines, or else force protection for the supply lines will divert troops from the tip of the spear to providing the means to get them into the field.

The troop increase will now get debated in Congress, where Democrats are already leery of any troop increases, and the Administration is counting on the GOP to have the votes to approve the measures.

Then, there's the 800 pound gorilla in the room that is Pakistan. The Pakistani government has been engaging in a lengthy military operation against the frontier provinces, but whether the government has the resolve to see that fight against the Taliban through to completion remains to be seen. The Taliban remain a serious threat to the government in Islamabad, including its nuclear arsenal (and again here). Terrorists are striking at targets throughout Pakistan regularly in response to the military operations in the frontier provinces, including a Pakistani politician today who was among more than 20 killed in a bombing. Those terrorists are also busy inside Afghanistan.

The US has to dance delicately around the issue of carrying out airstrikes against Taliban and al Qaeda targets inside Pakistan and the frontier provinces because the Islamists in Pakistan could overthrow the government. The Pakistani government itself has to do a delicate dance about the Islamists since it is responsible for nurturing Islamic terrorism.

NY Budget Crisis Continues; Spending Cuts Planned

New York's budget situation is a such a mess that no one can even agree on the size and scope of the problem. Profligate spending tends to do that. The legislature is setting up to pass a $2.8 billion deficit reduction package, but Gov. Paterson says the deficit is $3.2 billion. State Comptroller Tom DiNapoli says the deficit is actually $4 billion.

Experts are warning that the deficit is likely to be $6-8 billion in just a few months time.

Legislative leaders say the plan they'll vote on avoids cuts that would force public worker layoffs, hurting school children and patient care or slowing an economic recovery.

Major elements of the plan include:

--$1.6 billion in cuts and temporary cash transfers from agencies to the general fund, already ordered by Paterson on Sunday. The cuts include 11 percent cuts to most state agencies, which are supposed to avoid layoffs.

--$391 million in federal stimulus funds for education that was supposed to be used in the 2010-11 fiscal year.

--$250 million projected to be collected under a new tax amnesty program.

--Over $600 million in cuts in several programs including health care that don't reduce jobs.

The plan includes several tentative revenue raisers, including $200 million anticipated in upfront payments for the vendor yet to be chosen to build and operate video slot machines at Aqueduct race track in a long overdue project and $200 million from the Battery Park City Authority, which requires approval from Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Paterson criticized the Legislature for rejecting the toughest measures of his $3.2 billion proposal made Oct. 15, but will accept them in bills expected to be passed Wednesday. He complained lawmakers were "afraid'' of the powerful public employee unions protecting school aid and health care.

In other words, much of these cuts aren't really cuts, but one-shot deals to attempt and close the deficit. It also doesn't address the structural deficit caused by having a too large workforce.

The fact that the state is now considering shifting federal stimulus dollars from 2011 to this year should send red flags that everyone is playing with funny money. The state doesn't have money; the feds printed up more money to throw around in the stimulus package, and it is now going to fill structural deficits accrued by states that spent more than revenue projections would have allowed for.

It also once again highlights the fact that had New York simply kept their spending at last year's level (let alone the FY2007-2008 levels), the state would not be in this dire a position. In FY2007-2008, the state budget was $118.3 billion. FY2008-2009 increased that to $124.3 billion. That's a 5% increase at a time when the state economy was contracting sharply. There are shenanigans with the budget figures as well, as the Governor's budget figures for FY 2010 when looking back at FY 2009 suggest that the state budget was merely $119.7 billion while the FY 2010 budget will come in at $121 billion. That compares with the legislative approval of a state budget that was $131 billion.

Still, even with the jury rigged figures proposed by the Governor's office, the structural deficits will hit hard in just a few years time. In fact, the Governor projects $11 billion in structural deficits accruing in five years as a best case scenario; the worst case - $70 billion.

There are also operational problems with the Legislative option, including the fact that the weak economy will not generate the kinds of revenues expected from the Aqueduct project. The state is betting (literally and figuratively) on a long shot to balance the budget, and there's little evidence that the economy is improving to justify the revenue targets.

The Rebuilding of Ground Zero, Part 88

Groundbreaking on the new Fiterman Hall took place yesterday, but it was not without a bit of controversy sparked by none other than the irritable and despicable New York City Councilman Charles Barron, who took offense with not being on the dais for the ceremony and got into a shouting match with a CUNY Trustee.

Barron accused Mayor Bloomberg and others of "disrespecting" him and the students who had fought for a new building.

"The mayor gets up here and doesn't even respect us enough to even mention that students were even involved in it at all," Barron said during the groundbreaking for Fiterman Hall at Borough of Manhattan Community College.

At that point, CUNY trustee Jeffrey Wiesenfeld rose from his front-row seat and said, "When was the last time you respected somebody? You're a disgrace!"

"You be quiet. No one's talking to you," shot back Barron, chairman of the council's Higher Education Committee, as a couple of hundred invited guests looked on in wonderment. "You're a sickening racist, so you can go to hell!"

When Wiesenfeld told Barron to await his turn to speak, the councilman retorted: "Whether you like it or not, I'm here and I'm not going nowhere."

The exchange is here:



Even as the groundbreaking was underway, Steve Cuozzo reminds everyone that Fiterman Hall could have been refurbished and rebuilt following the damage sustained in the 9/11 attacks. The years of delays in securing financing led to the very problems alleged - mold infestations that proved too much to clean:

So after it was damaged on 9/11, CUNY held out for a whole new building. The original very likely could have been fixed -- but, as then-Deputy Mayor Dan Doctoroff told us in 2004, "They don't think it's the ideal building for their purposes."

If it was truly beyond repair, CUNY never proved it. Although it had $120 million in insurance funds for repairs, it wanted $56 million more from the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation to knock it down and start over -- holding the eyesore hostage for years as it cast a pall on the doorstep of the new 7 World Trade Center.

The Fiterman fiasco bounced back and forth among CUNY, three governors and City Hall. When the LMDC finally agreed to put in more dough, CUNY designed a fancier building and demanded even more money. Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver squeezed a reluctant Mayor Bloomberg to pump $70 million into a bloated $259 million tab.

By the time CUNY got everything it wanted, Fiterman Hall had finally turned as toxic as the school first claimed -- further delaying demolition.

Meanwhile, a look around Ground Zero would reveal a hive of construction on multiple projects. There are at least nine heavy lift cranes operating around the site - four alone at the Freedom Tower, including two tower cranes. Two other tower cranes are operating at Ground Zero, not counting the tower crane for the ongoing demolition of the former Deutsche Bank building, which appears to have had it's current top floor demolished by the look of the scaffolding slowly coming down.

Steel continues rising on the Freedom Tower (1WTC), and the steel crosswork and angular form of the lower floors of the tower are starting to come into focus.

At the same time, construction is underway throughout the temporary PATH station, including new stair access to the subway platforms and overlaying and interlacing the Calatrava design on top of the existing structures. It strikes me as a tremendous waste of money to see so much of the temporary station demolished; it was built with five tracks and three platforms, but two of the tracks are now fully out of commission and one platform is out of service. Was it necessary to build that additional capacity in the temporary station when the final design would require their demolition? It would have made more sense to pare down the temporary station so that construction could proceed, saving everyone money in the process.

On My Nightstand: Waiting on a Train

Waiting on a Train: The Embattled Future of Passenger Rail Service--A Year Spent Riding across America by James McCommons, is the latest book to grace my nightstand. It recalls highlights and lowlights of rail travel across the nation. There are some very well utilized rail corridors, and then there are routes that are extremely scenic that are or should be tourist destinations in their own right.

McCommons thinks that the solution may be at hand with President Obama's commitment to high speed rail, but I think he's sorely mistaken on that point. Spending money on new infrastructure when there's insufficient funding for maintenance and rehabilitation of existing rail infrastructure is a part of the reason rail travel in the US is in such dire straits.

Some states are trying to take it upon themselves to fund rail travel in their states, but the subsidies do not cover the costs, and there are calls for raising the gas taxes to cover rail infrastructure improvements.

Time and time again, the claim is made in the book that rail travel would compete well with air travel and cars, but I think that argument goes only so far. It might compete with cars for short hauls, if rail service were frequent and managed a good service record of on-time performance. Medium haul runs into air travel's benefits of speed to destination and cost.

At long distance, there is no comparison in cost and time between rail and air travel; air travel wins.

That's why there are short and medium distance routes that should be targeted for improvement.

Then, there are issues with expanding rail infrastructure that go unremarked upon. That includes the NIMBY issues facing the creation of new rights of way and opposition in some areas to increased rail traffic because of grade-level crossings, and other similar issues.

Cost is another hurdle that would have to be overcome, particularly in bringing existing infrastructure up to modern standards.

Consider too the choices made by the federal government and Amtrak, including on their flagship Acela service. Those trains have never lived up to their billing, and that's due to a combination of mechanical faults and infrastructure issues of trying to shoehorn a high speed rail system onto a standard speed and freight network.

Still, this is a good book to expose many of the issues facing the rail industry and hopes for passenger rail in the US.

Obama Sets End Date On Afghan War

President Obama is calling for the withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan in three years. You wouldn't have to look at a calendar to know that this seems rather unusual to plan the conclusion of a war based on a date and not on actually winning the war.

The US didn't wage World War II with an end-date in mind. The Allies waged the war to win unconditional surrender. Now, President Obama appears to time the end of the Afghan operations with US national elections.

Is that a cynical connection to make? Hardly.

It's yet another political calculation made by President Obama in the course of trying to come up with an Afghan policy.

President Obama is setting an end-date for the war in Afghanistan, which not a winning solution.

President Obama intends to conclude the Afghanistan war and withdraw most U.S. troops within three years, according to senior administration officials.

Obama is sending 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan and ordering military officials to get the reinforcements there within six months, White House officials told CNN Tuesday.

Obama will travel to the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, New York, later Tuesday to officially announce his plans. It would to be his second escalation of U.S. forces in the war-torn Islamic country since he came to power in January.

He's basically telegraphing to the Taliban and all our enemies that they simply have to outlast the US resolve to succeed.

It's the worst possible outcome here, and doesn't stand even a modicum of scrutiny. After all, how can he vow to bring home the troops if the situation remains as it has been since 2001 - which is the Afghan/Pakistani border remains porous and through which Taliban and al Qaeda continue to operate from safe havens on both sides of the border. Even though US and Pakistani efforts to attack those safe havens have culled the number of Taliban and thwart efforts to reestablish safe havens, the threat remains. Telegraphing the long term strategy means that the Taliban and al Qaeda will tailor their response accordingly. They will most likely do all they can to hasten the troop withdrawals through further attacks and make life absolutely miserable for all involved.

Withdrawing US forces would also make the situation for the Afghan government even more difficult, as the US force has been one of the few stabilizing factors at play in a region that has seen nothing but strife and war for the last three decades.

Seattle Police Kill Suspected Cop Killer

The eagle-eyed police officer who saw something suspicious at a vehicle stop is a hero. Maurice Clemmons was found in the vicinity of a stolen car and when a police officer requested he show his hands, Clemmons did not comply.

The man suspected of gunning down four police officers in a suburban coffee shop was shot and killed by a lone patrolman investigating a stolen car early Tuesday. Four people were arrested for allegedly helping the suspect elude authorities during a massive two-day manhunt.

Maurice Clemmons was carrying a handgun he took from one of the dead officers when a Seattle policeman recognized him near a stolen car in a working-class south Seattle neighborhood about 2:45 a.m., Assistant Police Chief Jim Pugel said.

The officer had approached the car, then detected movement behind him, saw Clemmons and ordered him to show his hands and stop.

"He wouldn't stop," Pugel said. "The officer fired several rounds, took the person into custody."

Clemmons had a serious gunshot wound from one of the four officers killed in the coffee-shop shooting. He has since died from his injuries, Pugel said.

The officer was investigating a stolen vehicle report. Clemmons was carrying a weapon taken from one of the officers he murdered. He also had a gunshot wound in the torso from return fire by one of the four officers killed at the coffee shop in Lakeland.

It's a bittersweet day for the Seattle area law enforcement agencies. They can rest a bit easier knowing that a cop killer is no longer in their midst, but they have to deal with the ramifications of the murder of four of their fellow officers in the line of duty.

At the same time, investigations continue into others who apparently provided Clemmons with assistance. Four people are in custody, including relatives, and more arrests are likely.

Just as it should, the clemency record of Mike Huckabee is coming under closer scrutiny. He commuted nearly twice as many sentences in his tenure as Arkansas governor than the three previous governors combined.

On Monday, Huckabee said he takes responsibility for making Clemmons eligible for parole in 2000, and called the case a failure of the justice systems in Arkansas and Washington. Huckabee cited the length of Clemmons' sentence — 108 years — and a state judge's recommendation that it be reduced as factors in his decision.

"If I could have known nine years ago that this guy was capable of something of this magnitude, obviously I would have never granted a commutation. It's sickening," Huckabee said on Fox News Channel's "The O'Reilly Factor."

Clemmons was among 1,033 people who were pardoned or had their sentences reduced during Huckabee's 10 1/2 years as governor. Bill Clinton, Frank White and Jim Guy Tucker granted 507 clemencies in the 17 1/2 years they served. Beebe, Huckabee's Democratic successor, has issued 273 commutations and pardons since taking office in January 2007 — all but one of them were pardons after the completion of the inmates' prison terms.

Huckabee's role in gaining the release of a convicted rapist, Wayne DuMond, was the subject of an attack ad during his presidential run. While Huckabee's predecessor, Tucker, reduced DuMond's sentence making him eligible for parole, Huckabee took steps almost immediately after taking office to win DuMond's release.

Two members of the state parole board said Huckabee pressured them to show DuMond mercy, while Huckabee publicly questioned whether DuMond was guilty of the rape of a teenage girl. During the presidential primaries, a conservative group aired television commercials in South Carolina featuring the mother of Carol Sue Shields, whom DuMond killed in 2000 after his release.

And while he claims that he wouldn't have made the same choice had he known what would have happened in the Clemmons case, his PAC website continues to cast blame on others.

UPDATE:
Watch for the inevitable scrutiny for the police officer who ultimately killed Clemmons. He will be put through the ringer to justify his actions. Also, watch for an all too likely wrongful death lawsuit from Clemmons' family, even though Clemmons acted irrationally and violent at every opportunity.

Photo of the Day

 

One of the waterfalls in Spearfish Canyon, taken using my Canon Rebel XTi with the Tamron 28-300mm XR Di VC (image stabilizer).