Matthew Shepard Act on fast track to becoming law

Found in my inbox, from Senator Carl Levin:

This week, Congress took an important step to protect those who have been targeted because of the color of their skin, their religion, their disability, their gender, or their sexual orientation.

Yesterday, the Senate and House Armed Services Committees agreed to a final version of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 that included the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act. This legislation will likely be passed by both Houses of Congress and signed into law by President Obama in the coming days.

As Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, I am delighted that we were able to include this landmark legislation in the National Defense Authorization Act because it embodies values of diversity and freedom that our men and women in uniform fight to defend.

As Senator Ted Kennedy said in 2007 when we debated this legislation:

"We want to be able to have a value system that is worthy for our brave men and women to defend. They are fighting overseas for our values. One of the values is that we should not, in this country, in this democracy, permit the kind of hatred and bigotry that has stained the history of this Nation over a considerable period of time. We should not tolerate it. We keep faith with these men and women who are serving overseas when we battle that hatred and bigotry and prejudice at home."

According to the FBI, between 1998 and 2007, more than 77,000 hate crimes incidents were reported. The trend is up for hate crimes based on sexual orientation - with a six percent increase in such crimes in the most recent year for which statistics are available, from 1,195 in 2006 to 1,265 in 2007. This is a major new category of hate crimes that would be covered, for the first time, by this legislation.

This law would punish violent acts, not beliefs. It would provide federal protection for victims of violent crimes where the offender intentionally selects the victim because of his or her actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, ethnicity, gender, disability, or sexual orientation.

I want to emphasize that this legislation only applies to violent, bias-motivated crimes and does not infringe on any conduct protected by the First Amendment. The right to organize against, preach against and speak against any way of life is left intact with this legislation.

We must make America a fully inclusive nation, a country that does not tolerate violent acts against individuals because of who they are. I am proud to be able to report that this week we have taken a very important step toward that goal.

While I can't say I agree with putting it in the Defense Authorization Bill, I'm glad this is going to become law soon.

Bits of Tid: July 24, 2009

• The rest of the world loves America much more under Obama than under his predecessor.
• State lawmakers from across the country are supporting the public option.
• Want to help cut healthcare costs? Here's one idea: Discuss end-of-life issues with your family and friends. I know it's not easy, but it's better to have these kinds of discussions now.
• Neat.
• Is bipartisanship dead? Not according to Senators Levin and McCain. Having sponsored the Weapons System Acquisition Reform Act, they are now seeking to close a tax loophole regarding executives and stock options.
• Um, okay. Read into this what you will. (Poli-sci major here.)
  
• Cupcake, anyone?

Candidates, others react to Bush's State of the Union address

The official Democratic response to the State of the Union was given by Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius:



The Presidential candidates offered their two cents as well. Here's Barack Obama:



Hillary Clinton:

President Bush had one final chance tonight to acknowledge what the American people have known for years: that the economy is not working for middle class families. Unfortunately, what he offered was more of the same - a frustrating commitment to the same failed policies that helped turn record surpluses into large deficits, and push a thriving twenty-first century economy to the brink of recession.

John Edwards:

"The president tonight renewed his call for an economic recovery plan. But the plan he and Congress have offered leaves out tens of millions of Americans who need help the most. This plan would take months to have any impact, and the people I meet everyday on the campaign trail do not have months to wait. These people are hurting now and need this help now. Over the past seven years, typical workers' paychecks have failed to keep up with inflation, millions of families are facing the loss of their homes to foreclosures, health insurance premiums have doubled, and families are spending $1,000 more a year on gasoline. The State of the Union may be interesting political theater, but until we find bold solutions to the challenges facing the country, we will be stuck with the same old small, Washington answers."

Michigan politicians with their reactions include Carl Levin:

“We need to turn the page on President Bush’s ‘more of the same’ policies and priorities that he continued to offer in his State of the Union address. Democrats and Republicans in Congress need to seek common ground to turn that page.

Debbie Stabenow:

"Unfortunately, the President is pushing a stimulus package that leaves out one of the quickest, most effective ways to stimulate our economy – extending unemployment insurance. Economists and experts from both sides of the aisle agree that extending unemployment insurance will immediately boost consumer spending, while allowing individuals more time to search for a job in a difficult market. I will continue to lead this effort in the Senate Finance Committee."

John Conyers:

Near the end of his speech, the President asked us to "trust the people," and promised that as long as we do so, "our Nation will prosper, our liberty will be secure, and the State of our Union will remain strong." There's a great post on DailyKos about that passage, showing a series of statistics of how many Americans disagree with the President on Iraq, warrantless surveillance and torture. I am also certain that if you asked the millions of Americans in danger of foreclosure, or bankruptcy due to medical bills, or parents with children in failing schools, they would have a very different take on the state of our union than the President. So in that last section of the address, I found a ray of hope--a year from now, we will be addressed by a new President, and I trust that the people will reflect on the hardships and disappointments brought on by the Bush Administration, and that they will elect someone ready to lead the country in a new direction.

Bits of Tid: January 29, 2008

A Quarter of a Thousand Edition

• This is Post #250 on Great Lakes, Great Times, Great Scott!
  
• Check out Michigan Liberal for a liveblog of the State of the State! The address will be given at 7PM. You should be able to see it on your local PBS station.
  
• Yours truly was interviewed by 9&10 News regarding the State of the Union! Watch the video; I'm the guy in the blue shirt.
• State Senate Democrats have a new blog!
  
• Want to help get healthcare on the ballot this November? Check out HealthcareForMichigan.org to see what you can do.
• "We have an opportunity to make critical progress in 2008," says Carl Levin in his preview of the new year in Congress.
• Less than 6,700 hours until the polls open on Election Day!
  
• January is Michigan Mentoring Month, School Board Recognition Month, and Stalking Awareness Month. You have about 56 more hours to celebrate!
  

Have you contacted your elected officials lately?

Oftentimes it can seem as though our elected officials ignore our opinions and treat us as meaningless and indifferent - like we don't matter to them, because we don't care.

But the fact remains, as it has for more than two centuries, that this is our government. Elected officials must answer to us. Many of them understand that if they ignore the wishes of We the People, they do so at their own peril.

Likewise, we citizens have a responsibility to let our members of Congress know where we stand on issues we feel important. I think one of the many reasons members of Congress and others in government often ignore our wishes is because we don't let them know what's on our minds. If elected officials don't hear from us, how will they know whether they're voting with the wishes of their constituents?

In that spirit, earlier this week (before the Capitulation) I took the opportunity to contact the office of Senator Carl Levin, Chairman of the Armed Services Committee, to discuss some of the goings-on in Washington. Below lies a very rough transcript of what I, Scott (S), discussed with the Senator's aide (A).

A: Senator Carl Levin’s office.
S: Hi, my name is Scott Urbanowski, and I'm calling because I wanted to share a few of my thoughts and ask a couple of questions regarding some of the goings-on in Washington.
A: Okay.
S: First of all, could you please send my kind regards to the Senator for his efforts to end credit card abuse, and also for the American Manufacturing Initiative.
A: Sure will.
S: Now, I understand the Senator voted against Feingold-Reid, and wanted to know why.
A: Feingold-Reid was actually an amendment to a water resources bill. Had it passed, President Bush would have vetoed the entire water resources bill, and Levin didn’t want the entire bill vetoed just because of that. The Senator does remain committed to ending the war
S: Also, what is the status of the 100 Hour Plan bills passed by the House in January? Have any of them passed the Senate?
A: Do you have a specific one in mind?
S: Yes, I was wondering about the status of the bill that would reduce student loan interest rates.
A: Let me look that up.
(a moment later)
A: My computer is running a little slow. I'll give you a website where you can check the status of any piece of legislation: It's at Congress.gov.
S: Okay, I'll check it out. Thank you very much.
A: You're welcome.

Silence is assumed to equal assent. Don't be silent. Our elected officials need to hear from us. Pick up the phone, write a letter... just do something to let your members of Congress how you feel. Start by visiting Senate.gov and House.gov Otherwise, you're just giving them an excuse to neglect you.

URGENT - Tell Carl & Debbie to Save Our Troops ASAP

Our troops desperately need us.

If you go to Daily Kos or Democratic Underground, the big story on both of those websites is ‘the deal’ in which certain Democratic leaders abandoned their party, the troops, and our country by backing down on benchmarks for bringing our troops home to safety.

Some would have us give up and concede that this bill will be passed without a fight.

The fact is, the battle is not over yet. The spending bill has not yet been passed. We cannot be like those aforementioned leaders and cower. Our troops need us.

We must make one last-ditch effort to support our troops. While our brave men and women fight over there in a war that was not of their choosing, we must fight for them back here.

Call Carl’s Washington office at (202) 224-6221.
Call Debbie’s Washington office at (202) 224-4822.
And don’t forget your Representative.

Carl and Debbie supported our troops at the beginning, opposing this war when it wasn’t popular to. Now the American people want our troops home; indeed our country needs them home.

So Please, folks, I implore you: For the sake of our brave men and women overseas, urge Carl and Debbie to oppose this ill-conceived spending bill.

Bits of Tid: February 2, 2007

Happy February!

• The US Senate has passed a minimum wage increase!
• The Democratic National Committee (DNC) has launched an online series on Black History Month. Maya Angelou is the first to be profiled.
• Senator Carl Levin is featured on the website of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
• The DSCC's House counterpart, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, will likely invest money toward beating Reps. Tim Walberg of southern Michigan and Joe Knollenberg of Oakland County.
• Al Gore, Nobel Laureate? He's been nominated. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised to see Bill Clinton get it (possibly jointly with George H.W. Bush), but if that ever happens, it likely won't be until Hillary's career is over.
• Al Franken is running for US Senate in 2008.
• The watchdog blog Eye on Ehlers - which I founded just before the New Year - has earned a mention in a page dedicated to Congressman Ehlers in the newly expanded GOP Watch section of the Michigan Democratic Party's website. I feel special.

America says NO to Bush's proposed 'surge'

An AP poll says 70% of Americans say President Bush's proposed 'surge' in troops being sent to Iraq is a bad idea. That includes 56% of conservatives.

Wesley Clark thinks it's a bad idea:

The recent congressional elections - which turned over control of both houses to the Democrats - were largely a referendum on President Bush, and much of the vote reflected public dissatisfaction with the war in Iraq. Most Americans see the US effort as failing, and believe that some different course of action must be taken. Most favour withdrawing forces soon, if not immediately. The report of the Iraq Study Group is widely seen as a formal confirmation of US failure in Iraq.

...

What the surge would do, however, is put more American troops in harm's way, further undercut US forces' morale, and risk further alienation of elements of the Iraqi populace. American casualties would probably rise, at least temporarily, as more troops are on the streets; we saw this when the brigade from Alaska was extended and sent into Baghdad last summer. And even if the increased troop presence initially intimidates or frustrates the contending militias, it won't be long before they find ways to work around the obstacles to movement and neighbourhood searches, if they are still intent on pursuing the conflict. All of this is not much of an endorsement for a troop surge that will impose real pain on the already overstretched US forces.

...

The truth is that, however brutal the fighting in Iraq for our troops, the underlying problems are political. Vicious ethnic cleansing is under way right under the noses of our troops, as various factions fight for power and survival. In this environment security is unlikely to come from smothering the struggle with a blanket of forces - it cannot be smothered easily, for additional US efforts can stir additional resistance - but rather from more effective action to resolve the struggle at the political level. And the real danger of the troop surge is that it undercuts the urgency for the political effort. A new US ambassador might help, but, more fundamentally, the US and its allies need to proceed from a different approach within the region. The neocons' vision has failed.

So does John Edwards:

"George Bush's expected decision to adopt the McCain Doctrine and escalate the war in Iraq is a grave mistake.

"The new Congress must intercede to stop Bush from stubbornly sticking to the same failed course in Iraq and refuse to authorize funding for an escalation of troops. They should make it clear to the President that he will not get any money to put more of our troops in harm's way until he provides a plan to turn responsibility of Iraq over to the Iraqi people and to ultimately leave Iraq. George Bush wants to dig a deeper hole, but we need to climb out.

"The situation in Iraq demands a political solution — the Iraqi people must take responsibility for their country. Escalating the war in Iraq, which our own generals agree won't help, sends the wrong message to the Iraqi people, to the region, and the world. In order to get the Iraqis to take responsibility for their country, we must show them that we are serious about leaving, and the best way to do that is to actually start leaving and immediately withdraw 40–50,000 troops. Once the U.S. starts leaving, the Iraqi people and other regional powers will be forced to step up and engage in the search for a political solution that can bring an end to sectarian violence and allow reconstruction to take hold, creating — as should have been done long ago — Iraqi jobs for Iraqis."

Not to mention Carl Levin:

“An escalation of American troops is a flawed strategy for two reasons: it implies that there is a military solution to the violence when what’s needed is a political solution among the Iraqi leaders, and it suggests that the future of Iraq is in our hands not theirs.

“More promises by the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future and more statements by the President on the need for doing so are no substitute for U.S. actions to force political compromises by the Iraqis. The President did not set benchmarks for the Iraqis that have hard deadlines and clear consequences for failure.

“The President's long-overdue words are that we are ending the open-ended commitment to Iraq, but the reality is that he is sending the opposite message to the Iraqis by putting more American military men and women in the middle of Iraqi sectarian violence.

Of course, John McCain thinks the surge is a great idea.

With so many Americans saying the surge is the wrong way to go, is it any wonder Rasmussen says Bush's approval rating is the lowest it's ever been?

Levin (D-Awesome) to run for re-election

It's been a hectic few weeks, but now that I finally have a chance to post, here's some good news to make the wait worth it.

WASHINGTON - Democratic Sen. Carl Levin, the incoming chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said Monday he will seek re-election in 2008.

The 72-year-old Michigan lawmaker was widely expected to seek a sixth term and will enter the race a heavy favorite. With Democrats winning control of the Senate, Levin will take the helm of the Armed Services panel, giving him a major role in shaping Iraq policy.

The Detroit lawmaker has called for troop withdrawals from Iraq beginning within four to six months. He has criticized the Bush administration for making the war open-ended, saying the White House has provided the Iraqis with a blank check with the presence of U.S. troops.

Levin said he hopes to win another term, citing his work on Armed Services and on issues crucial to Michigan's automotive and manufacturing industries.

Carl is most likely a shoe-in. He won 61% of the vote in a Republican year (2002), and he was named one of America's 10 Best Senators by TIME Magazine.

Levin to lead Senate investigation into rendition, torture

The Guardian has the scoop:

Abuses carried out under the CIA's secret programme of extraordinary rendition are to be investigated by one of the Senate's most powerful committees, it emerged today.

The new chairman of the Senate armed services committee, the Democratic senator Carl Levin, revealed that he was "not comfortable" with the rendition system and said it was making the US less secure.

...

Asked whether he would investigate the renditions programme, including the secret prisons and missing detainees, Mr Levin replied: "Yes. Yes, yes and yes."

...

Amnesty International has described extraordinary renditions as a policy of "disappearances" and welcomed Mr Levin's announcement.

"It is long overdue," an Amnesty spokeswoman said. "Many aspects of the US war on terror are of concern and are questionable. There is a need for greater transparency and we need to know who has been taken and where."

...

Mr Levin made his comments as he was outlining the priorities of the committee after the Democrats' gain in last week's midterm elections. The first order of business would be to change the direction of Iraq policy, he said.

Good going for Michigan’s longest-serving US Senator in history, whom TIME Magazine named one of America’s 10 Best Senators. Now if only we can get Debbie on board…