Domestic Policy

Bush Gets Low Marks in Recent Poll
According to a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, only 41 percent of the public gives President Bush good marks for being "honest and straightforward"-his lowest ranking on this question since he became president. This marks a drop of nine percentage points since January, when a majority (50 percent to 36 percent) indicated that Bush was honest and straightforward. This finding comes at a time when the Bush administration is battling the perception that its rhetoric on Iraq doesn't match up to the realities, and also allegations that chief political adviser Karl Rove leaked sensitive information about a CIA agent to a reporter in order to discredit her husband, a critic of the Bush administration.
Source: NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll, July 14, 2005

Bush Slashes Veterans' Health Care
The Bush administration acknowledged that it is short $1 billion for covering current needs at the Department of Veterans Affairs this year. The Bush administration and House Republicans have been the main focus of anger among veterans organizations. Their "policies are inconsistent with a nation at war," said Steve Robertson, legislative director of the American Legion. They violate the basic military value of "an army of one, teamwork, taking care of each other," he said.
Source: The Washington Post, "Funds for Health Care of Veterans $1 Billion Short," Thomas B. Edsall, June 24, 2005

ACLU: Bush Restricting Science
The American Civil Liberties Union charged the Bush administration with placing science under siege by overzealously tightening restrictions on information, individuals, and technology in the name of homeland security. Since the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks the government has actively increased the use of classifying information to keep it secret, including the use of the category "unclassified but sensitive" and extending classification authority to more departments, the ACLU said. The report lists other science restrictions, including limiting the access of foreign scholars to information, restricting their participation in some areas of research and tightening visa rules with the result of blocking or delaying visits to this country by foreign students and teachers. The ACLU charged the administration with trying to suppress information on such topics as global warming, mercury emissions and emergency contraception.
Source: Associated Press, "ACLU Says Bush is Restricting Science," June 21, 2005

House Defends Civil Liberties Against Bush Patriot Act
In a slap at President Bush, lawmakers voted to block the Justice Department and the FBI from using the Patriot Act to examine library records and bookstore sales slips. The House voted 238-187, despite a veto threat from Bush, to block the part of the anti-terrorism law that allows the government to investigate the reading habits of suspects. The vote reversed a narrow loss last year by lawmakers concerned about the potential invasion of privacy of innocent library users. They narrowed the proposal this year to permit the government to continue to seek out records of Internet use at libraries. "This is a tremendous victory that restores important constitutional rights to the American people," said Bernard Sanders, I-Vt., the sponsor of the measure. He said the vote would help "rein in an administration intent on chipping away at the very civil liberties that define us as a nation."
Source: The Associated Press, "House Votes to Limit Patriot Act Rules," Andrew Taylor, June 15, 2005

Black Church Leaders Embarrass Bush over African Aid Shortfall
Leading black pastors have embarrassed the administration by questioning the sincerity of its commitment to increasing aid to Africa, dealing a blow to White House efforts to boost support for Republicans among a traditionally hostile constituency. In a letter to the White House this week, the pastors demanded that George Bush give "ardent support" to Tony Blair's proposal that the leading industrialized countries double official aid to the world's poorest continent over a five year period. The letter, for which its authors are seeking 1,000 signatures, states that although the Bush administration has tripled US financial assistance to Africa, this assistance is dwarfed by the sums spent on tax cuts and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Because Republicans have fared poorly with African-American voters, a rift with black religious leaders would be a political blow for Bush strategists.
Source: The Independent (UK) "Black Church Leaders Embarrass Bush over African Aid Shortfall," Rupert Cornwell, June 16, 2005

White House Sought Advice from Exxon on Kyoto Stance
President's George Bush's decision not to sign the Kyoto global warming treaty was partly a result of pressure from ExxonMobil, the world's most powerful oil company, and other industries, according to U.S. State Department papers. The documents, which emerged as Tony Blair visited the White House for discussions on climate change before the July G8 meeting, reinforce widely-held suspicions of how close the company is to the administration and its role in helping to formulate U.S. policy. In briefing papers given before meetings to the U.S. Undersecretary of State, Paula Dobriansky, between 2001 and 2004, the administration is found thanking Exxon executives for the company's "active involvement" in helping to determine climate change policy, and also seeking its advice on what climate change policies the company might find acceptable. Although Bush claims he's concerned about climate change, policy in this White House is being written by the world's most powerful oil company.
Source: The Guardian (UK), "White House sought advice from Exxon on Kyoto stance," John Vidal, June 8, 2005

Bush Administration Refuses to Comment on Possible Changes to Family and Medical Leave Act
The Department of Labor's proposals for revising parts of the 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) may cause hard-won family leave protections to be lost. Any change to the FMLA is important, because millions have had illnesses or other life events that fall under FMLA's umbrella. In an 18-month period in 1999 and 2000, nearly 24 million workers took leave for an FMLA-covered reason, according to the Labor Department's most recent figures. FMLA is often used in place of sick leave or disability coverage, which are not provided by all companies that are covered by FMLA. The Labor Department, which oversees the federal leave law, has the authority to make revisions, with a public comment process. The Department of Labor has not confirmed the content of their intended proposals, but opponents of FMLA — the very groups that fought the law's original passage 12 years ago — are reportedly pressuring the Bush administration to weaken the law by eliminating some of the circumstances in which employees may take unpaid leave and by restricting the use of intermittent leave (leave taken in small amounts, e.g. for ongoing chemotherapy).
Source: USA Today, "Family, medical leave act at center of hot debate," Stephanie Armour, May 25, 2005

Bush Vows to Veto Stem Cell Compromise Bill
The House of Representatives—including 50 Republicans—compromised on a bill to expand stem cell research, touted by scientists as a possible step toward finding cures for diseases and afflictions including Alzheimer's, cancer and paralysis. President Bush, however, said that he will veto any bill that uses federal funds for stem cell research. "The Congress has made its position clear, and I've made my position clear," Bush said. "I will be vetoing the bill they send to me if it were to pass the United States Senate." In response, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Penn., stated his opposition to the President, "Not to have the availability of the best in medical care is simply atrocious. The bill passed the House by a big margin. And I think when it is publicized further, that margin could grow to override a veto."
Source: Washington Post, "Bush Rejects Stem Cell Compromise," Mike Allen and Rick Weiss, May 26, 2005; CNN.com, "House passes embryonic stem cell bill"

Bush's National Energy Policy is Full of Smoke
When Bush announced his National Energy Policy on May 17, he vowed to fund research into "new, clean coal technologies." Although the administration has been handing out $250 million a year as an incentive for companies to develop technologies that reduce sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions, the General Accounting Office—the independent research arm of Congress—has repeatedly found this "Clean Coal Technology Program" wasteful and mismanaged. A 2001 report, for example, found eight clean coal projects suffering "serious delays and financial problems" and two of them in bankruptcy. Perhaps most importantly, the new technologies are doing little to actually "clean" coal. The Energy Department's own evaluations of clean-coal projects have shown that many new "clean coal" technologies are actually 40 percent less effective in removing sulfur dioxide emissions than the more conventional smokestack "scrubbers"—the technology required under the laws the administration has so diligently weakened.
Source: Mother Jones, "Dirty Money," Daphne Eviatar, May 26, 2005

Bush's "Political Capital" Account Drained
When Bush won reelection last fall, he declared that he had earned plenty of "political capital" that he intended to "spend." Six months later, however—according to Republicans and Democrats alike—his bank account has been significantly drained. In the past week alone, the Republican-led House defied his veto threat and passed legislation promoting stem cell research; and Senate Democrats blocked confirmation, at least temporarily, of his choice for U.N. ambassador. In addition, Bush's approval ratings in public opinion polls rank at the lowest level of his presidency. In the most recent Washington Post-ABC News poll, taken in May, 47 percent of Americans approved of Bush's performance, tying the lowest marks he ever received in that survey. Similarly, just 31 percent approved of his handling of Social Security, an all-time low in the Post-ABC poll, while only 40 percent gave him good marks for his stewardship of the economy and 42 percent for his management of Iraq. Other polls have recorded similar findings, with Bush's approval rating dipping as low as 43 percent in a Pew Research Center Survey.
Source: Washington Post, "Bush's Political Capital Spent, Voices in Both Parties Suggest," Peter Baker and Jim VandeHei, May 31, 2005

Phony News is A-Ok with Bush
The Bush administration has made ample use of prepackaged news reports. The journalistically questionable practice has seen an increase since Bush took office. Governmental agencies spanning from the Department of Agriculture to the Department of State have produced and distributed news segments that were picked up and run on local television news shows with no indication that they were not produced by a news agency. Recently, the Government Accountability Office released a decision that the practice violates covert propaganda laws. The administration ignored the decision and continued their use.
Sources: The Washington Post, "Administration Rejects Ruling on PR Videos", Christopher Lee, March 15, 2005; The New York Times, "Under Bush, a New Age of Prepackaged News", David Barstow and Robin Stein, March 13, 2005.

Bush's Pipe Dreams Closer to Reality
On March 16, 2005, the Senate voted to include Bush's proposal to drill in Alaska's Arctic Wildlife Refuge in its budget. If the budget is adopted, this move will allow for the proposal to be passed with a simple 51-vote majority later in the year - avoiding the threat of the filibuster that has defeated the proposal in the past.
Source: The New York Times, "Senate Votes to Allow Drilling in Artic Reserve", Sheryl Gay Stolberg, March 17, 2005.

Bush's "Town Meeting" Not Open to Everyone
Bush stopped in Denver on a recent tour of states to promote his Social Security privatization plan. At his town meeting, three audience members were asked to leave because of a bumper sticker on their car that read: No Blood For Oil. This is not the first time that peaceful objectors were told to leave one of Bush's Social Security forums. In early February 2005, Bush traveled to North Dakota where it is reported that more that 40 individuals were banned from attending his speech.
Source: The Washington Post, "Three Were Told to Leave Bush Town Meeting", Jim VandeHei, March 30, 2005.

Bush Used Natural Disaster to Aid in Re-Election
After a second hurricane roared through Florida in late 2004, Bush's political consultants advised a strong response in order to save his campaign in the devastated state. Soon after, federal money began to flood into the state prompting some Florida officials to wonder why so much money was being handed out so quickly. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was giving money freely, with little to no inspection and hardly any paperwork attached. Reports have said that Bush used the hurricane as an excuse to funnel money into Florida in order to strengthen his presidential campaign in the crucial state.
Source: The Sun-Sentinel, "State records show Bush re-election concerns played part in FEMA aid", Megan O'Matz and Sally Kestin, March 23, 2005.

Difficult Medicare Applications Sent Out
On March 28, 2005, the Bush administration began to send out new applications for Medicare to low-income individuals who might qualify for a financial subsidy with the program's new prescription drug benefit. Advocates and lawyers have deemed the form to be very complex and expect fewer than five percent of recipients to respond. The form asks complicated financial questions and the signature page says, "I understand that anyone who knowingly gives a false or misleading statement about a material fact in this information, or causes someone else to do so, commits a crime and may be sent to prison or may face other penalties."
Source: The New York Times, "Medicare Applications Sent to Low-Income Americans", Robert Pear, March 29, 2005.

Native Americans Angered by Bush's Delayed Response
Four days after the second deadliest school shooting in U.S. history, Bush finally acknowledged the tragedy that occurred on the Red Lake reservation. 16-year-old Jeff Wise killed nine and injured seven before turning the gun on himself. Reaction to Bush's initial silence was one of anger and frustration--the slight highlighted by his late-night maneuverings to respond to the Terri Schiavo case.
Source: The Washington Post, "Native Americans Criticize Bush's Silence", Ceci Connolly, March 25, 2005.

Administration Policies Keep Scientific Community Muted
Panelists at a national meeting of the American Association for Advancement of Science in late February complained that Bush's policies are making members of the scientific community afraid to share their findings. Surveys of U.S. Fish and Wildlife service members and statements from Environmental Protection Agency employees indicate that scientists feel pressured to show data that matches governmental policy, even when it does not. Participants said that the influence of the administration, along with budget cuts to many key scientific agencies, is creating an environment that does not foster advancements in science.
Source: Associated Press, "Scientists feel stifled by Bush administration," Feb. 21, 2005; Los Angeles Times, "Panelists Decry Bush Science Policies," Feb. 23, 2005

Bush Says No to Protecting Ocean Mammals
Claiming that the use of sonar is required for homeland security, the Bush administration has come out against international efforts to restrict the use of sonar anywhere in the world, especially by the U.S. Navy, even though the sonar poses a threat to ocean wildlife. This decision puts the administration at odds with many European nations (and shows that Bush's war on the environment is taking to the seas) as more evidence emerges linking the use of active sonar and the beaching of whales and other ocean mammals. In recent years, numerous whale, dolphin, and porpoise beachings have occurred after nearby naval vessels have used deep-water sonar. Some scientists believe that deep-water sonar, which can be heard for miles underwater, may scare or disorient ocean mammals, causing them to surface too quickly and suffer the equivalent of sudden decompression, which divers know as the bends.
Source: Washington Post, "U.S. Set To Oppose Efforts to Restrict Use of Sonar," Marc Kaufman, Feb. 28, 2005; Associated Press, "Dolphin beaching came after sub exercise," March 6

Bush Threatens Medicaid Funding Cuts
At a recent meeting with the National Governors Association, Bush emphasized his plan to cut tens of billions of federal dollars to Medicaid, the program that provides health care for 53 million poor and disabled people in the U.S. But governors of both parties strongly oppose Bush's plan. If Bush were to slash federal funding, much of which ensures that states can provide health care for those who cannot afford it, states will face many more problems of financing healthcare and those who have the most to lose will be at the greatest risk.
Source: Washington Post, "Governors Urged to Reach Deal on Medicaid," Ceci Connolly and Dan Balz, Feb. 28, 2005; Associated Press, "Governors Meet Bush, but Fret for Medicaid," March 1, 2005

Bush Outlines Social Security Plan That Would Hurt Those Who Need It Most
In the 2005 State of the Union address, Bush outlined a plan to privatize Social Security that has countless pitfalls, all of which would hurt women, people of color, people with disabilities and their dependents. Bush's plan to create private accounts would cut benefits for recipients now and in the future, create more national debt, create a retirement void for those who do not make enough money to save larger portions of their paychecks, and would put savings at risk in the stock market. When White House officials unveiled the Bush plan this month, they cited predictions by Social Security Administration estimating that two-thirds of all workers would choose private accounts. But the San Francisco Chronicle, noting that 55 percent of Gallup poll respondents recently said that private accounts sounded like a bad idea, asked Social Security's chief actuary about the source of the prediction, and he acknowledged it was not based on statistical data, surveys or participation rates in other types of retirement plans.
Sources: New York Times, "Spearing the Beast," Paul Krugman, Feb. 8, 2005; Office of House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, "Risky GOP Proposal Will Cut Social Security Benefits," Jan. 24, 2005; San Francisco Chronicle, "Tallying Personal Accounts," Feb. 17, 2005.

New Personnel System Threatens Government Employees' Collective Bargaining Power
The new personnel structuring system unveiled by the Bush administration earlier this year for use in the departments of Defense and Homeland Security is designed to undermine the unions of government workers, union leaders say. The new system allows supervisors to move employees and put new technologies into use without consulting employee unions; it also limits the role of the independent Federal Labor Relations Authority and gives internal labor relations boards more control. Though several unions are speaking out against the new personnel system, the White House is proposing legislation to change other government agencies to match the new system.
Sources: Washington Post, "Communication Breakdown Stokes Flap Between Homeland Security and Union," Stephen Barr, Feb. 14, 2005; Washington Post, "Civil Service System on Way Out at DHS," Christopher Lee, Jan. 27, 2005; Washington Post, "Bush Aims to Forge A GOP Legacy," Thomas B. Edsall and John F. Harris, Jan. 30, 2005; Federal Times Online, "The future of civil service: Reforms empower managers, set course for entire government," Tim Kauffman and Eileen Sullivan, Jan. 31, 2005

Bush's Election = Bad News for Environmentalists
Environmentalists are seeing some of their worst fears played out as Bush moves to cement a second-term agenda that includes getting more timber, oil and gas from public lands and relying on the market, rather than on regulation, to curb pollution. The AP reports that Bush's top energy priority as he enters his second term is to open an Alaskan wildlife refuge to oil drilling. The Bush administration supports minimal environmental regulation, believing that industry is best left to police itself. Environmentalists have called this the most anti-environmental administration ever.
Source: Associated Press, "For Environmentalists, Four More Years of Bad News," John Heilprin, Dec. 1, 2004

Bush Sides with the Drug Companies
In November 2004 the media focused on the pharmaceutical drug Vioxx and its dangerous side effects. Mounting evidence suggests that Merck, Vioxx's distributor, concealed proof that the painkiller can increase a consumer's chance of suffering a heart attack or stroke. Merck may have been aware of these potential dangers for at least the past five years. The Wall Street Journal uncovered a 16-page internal training document that encouraged Merck employees to dodge questions from doctors concerned about Vioxx's cardiovascular side effects. The Justice Department has launched an investigation into this matter. Jerry Avorn, a Harvard University drug safety expert says that "the FDA has been asleep at the switch in its regulatory function." Over 10,000 people are now filing lawsuits against Merck on behalf of those harmed or killed by taking the drug. Meanwhile, George W. Bush continues to strongly advocate tort reform, which would cap the amount of money victims of medical error could win in a lawsuit. In December 2003, FDA Chief Counsel Daniel Troy promised a group of drug industry lobbyists that "the FDA would exercise its intervention powers to protect [drug industry] defendants" from lawsuits. Since Bush took office, the FDA or Department of Justice has repeatedly intervened in cases on behalf of pharmaceutical company defendants, each time claiming that the FDA's own judgment to approve drugs means that drug companies cannot be held responsible.
Sources: American Progress Action Fund, "The Merck-y Case for Tort Reform," Christy Harvey, Judd Legum, and Jonathan Baskin, Nov. 10, 2004.

Bush Says the "P" Word
Has Bush blown the election with just one word? At a confidential luncheon with big-money supporters in September, Bush reportedly made the following announcement: "I'm going to come out strong after my swearing in with fundamental tax reform, tort reform, privatizing of Social Security." As AlterNet's David Corn reports, "Everyone in politics knows a candidate is not supposed to say [privatizing of Social Security]. Bush has been trained […] to talk about Social Security 'reform,' not privatization." Bush has dodged the question of Social Security for years, implying partial privatization without saying so directly. He hasn't endorsed a specific plan and he won't account for the $2 trillion short-term cost of such a move. Now we're beginning to see why.
Source: AlterNet, "Bush Said the 'F' Word," David Corn, Oct. 18, 2004.

Remembering Bush's Forgettable Blunders
In an article for AlterNet, Molly Ivins takes a look back at some of the less memorable Bush blunders from the past four years. Remember when Bush chose Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday to announce that his administration would oppose affirmative action in the University of Michigan case? Or how about the day a major earthquake hit the northwest U.S. and Bush decided to do away with a federal program designed to help communities deal with natural disasters? "Of course, Florida in an election year—different story," Ivins says. Despite rhetoric to the contrary, Bush allowed companies to switch from traditional fixed-benefit plans to cash-balance plans, which saves corporations millions of dollars a year, but which cause older workers to lose up to 50 percent of their pensions. Bush awarded companies who switch to the cash-balance plans a tax advantage. "It's the perfect Bush plan," says Ivins. "Corporations get to screw workers, and they get a tax break for it—plus, nobody can sue.”
Source: AlterNet, "Times Gone By," Molly Ivins, Oct. 19, 2004.

You Call This a Democracy?
As the Bush administration continues its reelection campaign, one cannot avoid hearing the president boast of the "democracy" he supposedly is spreading throughout Iraq and Afghanistan. However, according to evidence presented by journalist David Sirota, Bush should not be speaking about the wonders of democracy when he has done such damage to democracy at home. Some of the non-democratic actions going on right here in the U.S. are: allowing Florida Gov. Jeb Bush to clear felons off voter rolls in order to disenfranchise "traditionally Democratic voters," giving a voice to Republican efforts to censor minority voter turnout, and holding ceremonies for new immigrants to trick them into registering Republican. In addition, the government has detained a great deal of people who have organized political protests, such as peaceful AIDS demonstrators who were violently removed and then arrested for "disorderly conduct." As Sirota points out, the U.S. may not be the ideal democracy these days.
Source: In These Times, “You Call This a Democracy?” David Sirota, Sept. 28, 2004.

Bush's Hometown Newspaper Endorses Kerry
The Lone Star Iconoclast, the weekly newspaper in Bush's adopted hometown of Crawford, Texas, announced its endorsement of John Kerry for president in a Sept. 29 editorial. The publication's editors cited Bush's handling of the war in Iraq, his proposals on Medicare and Social Security and his fiscal irresponsibility as reasons for their decision. "The publishers of The Iconoclast endorsed Bush four years ago, based on the things he promised, not on this smoke-screened agenda,” the newspaper announced. "Today, we are endorsing his opponent, John Kerry."
Source: Capitol Hill Blue, "Bush’s Hometown Newspaper Endorses Kerry," Wire Reports, Sept. 29, 2004

Bush Fails in Promise to 'Leave No Child Behind'
In 2000, Bush promised our country an education plan that would rival those of the most progressive developed nations. According to the Center for American Progress, Bush's budget is now $9.4 billion less than the levels agreed to under the No Child Left Behind Act. Bush's failed education program mirrors the nation's worst budget shortfalls since World War II. The decrease in funding has eliminated 38 education programs, including after-school care, teacher quality initiatives, and school counseling.
Source: The Center for American Progress, "The Failed Promise to Leave No Child Behind," April 6, 2004

Log Cabin Republicans Oppose Bush's Re-Election
The Log Cabin Republicans, the largest group for lesbians and gay men in the Republican Party, have decided to oppose Bush's re-election this year due to his support for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.  On Sept. 7, the board voted 22-2 against endorsing Bush.  The group has criticized Bush in the past for supporting the amendment.  "Writing discrimination into our Constitution violates conservative and Republican principles," Executive Director Patrick Guerriero said last February.  "This amendment would not strengthen marriage—it would weaken our nation."  According to Log Cabin statistics, about 1 million gay men and lesbians voted for Bush in 2000.
Source: Capitol Hill Blue, "Gay Republicans to Bush: You Ain't Our Guy," Staff and Wire Reports, Sept. 8, 2004

Bush Snubs the Nation's Oldest and Largest Civil Rights Group
Julian Bond, chair of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the nation's largest and oldest civil rights group, criticized George W. Bush in July for his refusal to speak at its annual convention. Having declined an invitation to speak for a fourth year in a row, Bush is now the only president since Warren G. Harding who hasn't addressed the NAACP at some point in his administration. Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry, who addressed the NAACP conference on July 15, also criticized Bush's refusal, saying that a president should speak to all people. Bush, campaigning in Pennsylvania in July, said his relationship with NAACP leadership was "basically nonexistent'' and referred to being called "names'' by organization members. (Bond said in June that Bush and other Republicans were part of a "dark underside of American culture.'') While the White House blamed Bush's refusal partly on "hostile rhetoric," Bush accepted an invitation to speak to the Urban League on July 23, where he urged African Americans to consider voting Republican, yet did not mention his opposition to affirmative action.
Sources: "NAACP Head Asks Bush to Rethink Convention Snub," Reuters, The New York Times, July 10, 2004; "John Kerry Addresses NAACP," Voice of America, July 15, 2004; "Bush Opts for Urban League," Knight Ridder News Service, The Bradenton Herald, July 16, 2004; Bush Urges Blacks Not to Back Democrats, AP, Scott Lindlaw, July 23, 2004.

New Book Gets Inside W.'s Mind
In the new book 'Bush on the Couch,' psychoanalyst Justin Frank studies the president's public pronouncements and behavior, along with biographical data, to craft a comprehensive psychological profile of Bush 43. Poking around in the presidential psyche, Frank, a professor at George Washington University, indicates his research has uncovered a man suffering from megalomania, paranoia, a false sense of omnipotence, an inability to manage emotions, a lifelong need to defy authority, an unresolved love-hate relationship with his father and the repercussions of untreated alcohol abuse. Bush's hunt for Saddam Hussein, Frank writes, reflects ''the drive of an under-nurtured and emotionally hobbled infant.'' In a review of "Bush on the Couch," Salon.com says the book "brings together a lot of provocative information, and some genuinely enlightening hypotheses, from which the resourceful reader can assemble a portrait of Bush that accounts for his seeming contradictions."
Sources: "The Perils of Putting National Leaders on the Couch," Sally Satel, The New York Times, June 29, 2004; "George W. Bush: Presidential or Pathological?" Arianna Huffington, Working for Change, July 15, 2004; "The Inner W.," Laura Miller, Salon.com, June 16, 2004

Cheney Uses Profanity to Scold Senior Democrat on Senate Floor
During the annual Senate photo session on June 22, Vice President Dick Cheney, former CEO of Halliburton, the company that won a no-bid contract in Iraq and then allegedly overcharged the government for its work there, reportedly told Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont to go "f--- himself," various news agencies reported. As the Senate class was assembled, Cheney, who serves as president of the Senate, reportedly turned to Leahy and scolded the senior Democratic senator for his recent criticism of Cheney for Halliburton's alleged war profiteering, saying either "go f--- yourself" or "f--- off." When asked for comment later, Cheney's office did not deny that the exchange had taken place. The New York Times reported that Cheney said he did not regret it and "felt better" afterwards." The Washington Post notes that, interestingly, Cheney's profane outburst occurred on the same day the Senate passed legislation described as the "Defense of Decency Act" by 99 to 1. A June poll showed that 28% of Republicans think Bush should drop Vice President Dick Cheney from the Republican ticket.
Sources: "Sources: Cheney curses senator over Halliburton criticism," CNN, June 25, 2004; "Cheney Dismisses Critic With Obscenity," Helen Dewar and Dana Milbank, Washington Post, June 25, 2004; "Cheney Owns Up to Profanity Incident and Says He 'Felt Better Afterwards'" New York Times, June 26, 2004; "The Cheney Factor," David Paul Kuhn, CBSNews.com, June 18, 2004.

Polls Show Kerry Ahead; Voters Prefer Edwards to Cheney
A Los Angeles Times poll published June 10 shows Democratic candidate John Kerry leading George W. Bush by 55 percent to 44 percent. In a telephone poll that surveyed 1,230 registered voters nationwide, 56% percent felt that Bush was "too ideological and stubborn," The State reports. Kerry "led Bush by 51% to 44% nationally in a two-way matchup, and by 48% to 42% in a three-way race, with independent Ralph Nader drawing 4%." According to a CBS News poll released July 8, the Kerry/Edwards ticket is leading, receiving the support of 49% of registered voters compared to the 44% held by the Bush/Cheney ticket, and a majority of all voters, and seven in ten Democrats, said they are glad that Sen. John Edwards was chosen as the vice presidential candidate.
Sources: "Poll: Kerry Leads Bush by 7 Percentage Points," The State, June 11, 2004; "Poll: Kerry Leads Bush by 7 Pct. Points," The Associated Press, June 10, 2004; "In L.A. Times Poll Kerry Leads Bush By Six Points In Three-Way Race," The Frontrunner, June 10, 2004; "Poll: Voters Like VP Choice," CBS News, July 8, 2004

Feds Spend $134 Million-Plus on Reagan Holiday for Gov't Workers
The Bush administration's decision to shut down most of the federal government for one Friday in June in honor of the late Ronald Reagan was in keeping with a tradition that stretches back more than 50 years. But it was also a decision that cost taxpayers millions of dollars in government employee wages. Paul Light, an expert in governmental affairs at New York University, said it was ironic that the administration closed the government for Reagan. "He was relentless in his criticism of fraud, waste and abuse in government and would have looked on a day off for his funeral as a remarkable waste of taxpayer money," Light said. On CNN, Wolf Blitzer noted that some counties in California had decided that a government holiday would be "a waste of taxpayers' money."
Sources: "Taxpayers Take Hit on Reagan Holiday," Brian Faler, The Washington Post, June 14, 2004; "News from CNN," Wolf Blitzer and guests, June 10, 2004

Bush Campaigns on Domestic Programs Slated for Budget Cuts
George W. Bush appears to be planning to run for re-election as a tax cutter without acknowledging the federal programs that will be sacrificed to make up for the lost revenue. The White House put government agencies on notice this month that if Bush is reelected, his budget for the 2006 fiscal year may include spending cuts for virtually all agencies in charge of domestic programs, including education, homeland security and others. On the campaign trail, Bush has been touting Head Start and other education programs; a nutrition program for women, infants and children; and home ownership, job-training, medical research and science programs, all of which face cuts in his 2006 budget. Also slated for cuts are the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Science Foundation, the Small Business Administration, the Transportation Department, the Social Security Administration, the Interior Department and the Army Corps of Engineers. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reported that the White House has tried to deny that these budget cuts are being planned.
Sources: "Administration Memo Confirms Plans for Budget Cuts In Many Domestic Discretionary Programs in 2006," David Kamin, Richard Kogan, Robert Greenstein, Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, June 1, 2004; "Fiscal Shenanigans," editorial, The New York Times, June 3, 2004; "2006 Budget Cuts in Domestic Spending On Table," Jonathan Weisman, The Washington Post, May 27, 2004

Bush Administration's Medicare Ads Ruled 'Covert Propaganda'
The Bush administration has violated federal law by producing and disseminating television news segments that portray the new Medicare law as a boon to the elderly, a government agency said recently. The General Accounting Office (GAO) said May 19 that the videos—broadcast by at least 40 television stations in 33 markets—were a form of "covert propaganda" because the government was not identified as their source. The GAO said that a specific part of the videos, a made-for-television "story package," violated the prohibition on using taxpayer money for propaganda. People seeing the videos in a newscast would "believe that the information came from a non- government source or neutral party," it said. The GAO also found that the department had violated a second law, the Antideficiency Act, against using federal money for unauthorized purposes. Since "covert propaganda" is illegal, the GAO said, there were no funds authorized to produce it. The administration spent $44,000 for the three videos, two in English and one in Spanish. And they made it clear they would use the finding to try to further discredit the law, which surveys suggest most voters oppose. The GAO’s decision is not binding, but House Democrats immediately vowed to pressure the government to repay the money spent.
Sources: "White House’s Medicare Videos are Ruled Illegal," Robert Pear, The New York Times, May 20, 2004; "Mock News on Medicare Called Illegal," Vicki Kemper, The Los Angeles Times, May 20, 2004; "GAO Says HHS Broke Laws with Medicare Videos," Amy Goldstein, The Washington Post, May 20, 2004

Bush Helps Wall Street in Exchange for Campaign Contributions
Personnel from seven major securities firms have donated more than $2.33 million dollars to the Bush-Cheney ‘04 campaign, according to several recent news reports. In exchange, according to a number of reports, the Bush administration has championed causes that send money directly through the Wall Street investment banks. Three successive Bush tax cuts passed by Congress were specifically designed to lower taxation on savings and investment: The tax rate on most corporate dividends fell from 38.6 percent to 15 percent, and most capital gains are now taxed at 15 percent rather than 20 percent. Such measures were explicitly designed to encourage investment, thus channeling billions of dollars through Wall Street investment banks.
Sources: "Wall Street Firms Funnel Millions to Bush," Thomas B. Edsall and Jonathan Weisman, The Washington Post, May 24, 2004; "Bush Super Fundraiser Join the Queue for Favors," Paul Harris, The Observer, May 23, 2004; "Bundles of Influence," Tim Shorrock and Michael Scherer, Mother Jones, May 1, 2004

Bush Falls Off His Bike; Aides Blame Nonexistent Rain
George W. Bush, always star-crossed in his leisure pursuits, had another mishap May 22 when he fell off his bicycle during a 17-mile ride near his ranch in Crawford, Texas. Bush suffered scrapes and scratches on his chin, upper lip, nose, right hand, and both knees. Trent Duffy, a White House spokesman, immediately offered excuses for his boss. "It's been raining a lot, and the topsoil is loose," he said. However, Daily Kos, a political blog, noted that it hadn’t rained at all in Crawford for eight days before Bush’s bike accident, when the area got a measly three-tenths of an inch of rain. As Daily Kos put it: "As everything else, it wasn't Bush's fault. Nothing is Bush's fault. Ever."
Sources: "Bush Takes Tumble During Bicycle Ride," Dana Milbank, The Washington Post, May 23, 2004; "More Bush Lies?" The Daily Kos, May 23, 2004; Weather archives at wunderground.com

New Drug Discount Programs Cause Confusion, Frustration Among Seniors
As Republicans attempt to address confusion over the new Medicare prescription drug discount program scheduled to go into effect June 1, many seniors are already discovering that the program looks to be less helpful than promised. The new program includes 73 competing drug discount cards, each providing a different level of savings on a different selection of medications, and all subject to change. Among a number of retirees of different income groups, the initial reaction was incomprehension. "Even the person who came to explain it to us didn't understand it," Mary Shen, 77, at the Whittaker Senior Center on Manhattan's Lower East Side, told the New York Times. "It's not fair to expect seniors, who have enough difficulties already, to have to figure this out." Several prices posted on the Medicare website in mid-May were reportedly incorrect, and some drug companies said the government miscalculated what their cards would charge for certain prescriptions. Though Republican leaders claimed the cards would be an improvement on existing programs, some seniors have discovered that the new cards actually offer less coverage than certain state, union or consumer group plans. For some people, the cost of drugs under the new program could be 50 to 60 percent higher than what they currently pay. Critics charged that the discount cards were an attempt by the Bush administration to prevent the importation of cheaper prescription drugs from countries like Canada. Bush and Republican leaders pushed for the law in 2003 over the objections of many Democrats, who charged that the program offers limited benefits to seniors while providing large subsidies and other benefits for insurance companies, HMOs and drug manufacturers. For example, drug companies can change the prescriptions covered on a particular card or the prices at any time, while seniors can change cards only once per year.
Sources: "73 Options for Medicare Plan Fuel Chaos, Not Prescriptions," John Leland, The New York Times, May 12, 2004; "New Drug Card for Medicare Touted by GOP," Ceci Connolly, The Washington Post, May 4, 2004; "Medicare Drug Cards Rolled Out," William M. Welch, USA Today, May 4, 2004.

New Health Savings Account Tax Deductions Likely to Increase Number of Uninsured
A budget that seeks to expand enrollment in Health Savings Accounts (HSA) is likely to increase the number of uninsured people, a study says. The budget would allow HSA participants to claim a tax deduction for the premium costs of high-deductible insurance policies. Analysis by a leading health economist, Jonathan Gruber of M.I.T., finds that because of its adverse effects on employer-based coverage, this deduction would likely increase the numbers of the uninsured by 350,000. The administration estimates the cost of the plan at $24.8 billion over ten years. The deduction would benefit high-income taxpayers, while encouraging employers to drop employer-based coverage or not offer it in the first place. Gruber, who conducted his research for the Kaiser Family Foundation, found that the number of workers who would lose insurance because of employers dropping coverage would likely exceed the number of uninsured individuals who would gain coverage as a result of the deduction.
Sources: "Proposal for New HSA Tax Deduction Found Likely To Increase the Ranks of the Uninsured," Edward Park and Robert Greenstein, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, May 10, 2004; "The President's Costly Tax Deduction for High-Deductible Health Insurance Offers Little to the Uninsured and Could Undermine Existing Coverage," Joint Economic Committee Democrats, Feb. 2004

New Book Reveals Missteps in Bush Administration's Counter-Terrorism Efforts
Former White House counterterror adviser Richard A. Clarke recently caused a political stir by releasing a book of memoirs alleging that President Bush failed to act prior to Sept. 11 on repeated warnings of threats from al Qaeda and then "harvested a political windfall for taking obvious yet insufficient steps after the attacks." The book, "Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror," outlines the Bush administration's mishandling of terrorism both before and after September 11, 2001. According to the Washington Post, Clarke, who was appointed by Condoleeza Rice to a key leadership role minutes after the World Trade Center attacks, says that Bush "strengthened terrorists by pursuing a misguided focus on Iraq."

White House officials have avoided addressing the facts in Clarke's allegations, and instead are attempting to dismiss the veteran of four administrations as a "disgruntled former colleague and Democratic partisan" who "wasn't in the loop." Democratic operative Jim Jordan reflected on George Bush's dwindling strength in the election when the Post quoted him as saying that "about all that's still propping Bush up politically is the very positive impression that most voters have about his performance immediately following the attack." Clarke has reportedly said his reasoning for writing the book was influenced by increasing concerns "that too many of my fellow citizens were being misled."
Sources: Mike Allen and Dana Milbank. "White House Counters Ex-Aide: Advisers Call Clarke Disgruntled, Partisan." The Washington Post, March 23, 2004. Dan Eggen and Walter Pincus. "The Book on Richard Clarke: Style Served Him Well But Made Enemies." The Washington Post, March 23, 2004

Reports: Bush-Cheney Reelection Campaign Sold Illegally-Imported Jackets
According to a recent news reports, the official Internet merchandise site for the Bush-Cheney campaign has sold jackets illegally imported from Myanmar. Since September, the Bush administration has had sanctions in place against Myanmar—also known by its colonial name Burma—because of human rights violations in that country. While Spalding, the campaign's supplier of merchandise, said the jackets were included for sale on the Bush-Cheney site by mistake, Arvind Ganesan of Human Rights Watch told Reuters he was appalled by the error: "One would expect that they would be extremely diligent about where they buy their products." One of the products being sold on the website was a $49.95 red fleece pullover, embroidered with the Bush-Cheney '04 logo. It carried a "Made in Burma" label.
Source: Caren Bohan, "Made-In-Burma Jacket Stirs Flap," Reuters, March 19, 2004; Lauren Weber, "Reelection Togs May Have Come from Burma," Newsday, March 20, 2004.

Bush Uses 9/11 Images in Controversial Ad Campaign
The Washington Post reports that George W. Bush's use of 9/11 in political advertisements offends relatives of the victims of the terror attacks because the "television commercials using images from the attacks were exploiting the tragedy for political gain." One relative of a 9/11 victim reacted to the advertisements with disbelief, "the idea that President Bush would rally support around his campaign by using our loved ones in a way that is so shameful is hard for me to believe." The ads contain images taken on Sept. 11, 2001, including "a destroyed World Trade Center tower, firefighters carrying a flag-draped body, a man raising an American flag, and Bush speaking at a lectern." The president of the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), which called for the ads' withdrawal, described the ads as "absolutely disgraceful and disgusting." Patty Casazza, whose husband died in the 9/11 attacks, told CNN, "When I look at the ads and I see Bush speaking over the pictures of Ground Zero, I know in my heart that President Bush failed the 3,000 Americans that died there on that day."
Sources: Paul Farhi, "Bush Ads Using 9/11 Stir Anger," The Washington Post, March 5, 2004. Dan Froomkin, "Ads Raise Issue of Bush Testimony," The Washington Post, March 5, 2004.

Bush Endorses Anti-Marriage Constitutional Amendment
Vowing to "protect the institution of marriage," Bush publicly joined the right wing's plot to prevent same-sex marriages on Feb 24 by announcing his support of a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. In defining marriage explicitly as the union of a man and a woman, the current proposal before Congress uses vague and sweeping language that has the potential to deny not just marriage but also civil unions and domestic partnerships to same-sex couples. Without the legal recognition of marriage, same-sex couples are prevented from benefiting from the over 1,000 federal and state benefits afforded heterosexual married couples. Bush's endorsement follows two landmark decisions affecting equal marriage rights. The Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled on Feb. 4 that the state legislature can't offer "civil unions" instead of actual marriage licenses, paving the way for the first ever state-recognized same-sex marriages in U.S. history. And on Feb. 11, San Francisco city officials began issuing official marriage licenses to same-sex couples. On Feb. 18, Bush said he was "troubled" by same-sex marriages: "I have watched carefully what's happening in San Francisco, where licenses were being issued, even though the law states otherwise ... I have consistently stated that I'll support law to protect marriage between a man and a woman."
Read NOW's statement on Bush's endorsement of the anti-marriage amendment.
Sources: White House Office of the Press Secretary, Feb. 24; ABCNews, Feb. 18; Associated Press, Feb. 18

Bush's Approval Rating Declines, CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll Shows Kerry or Edwards Beating Bush
According to a Feb. 19 report by the Pew Research Center, Bush's approval rating continues to decline from 72% after the fall of Baghdad in April 2003, to 52% today. The same percentage of people surveyed—36%—used negative words to describe Bush as positive words. The use of negative words ("liar, arrogant, and stupid") increased to 36% from 27% in the past year, and the use of positive words ("honest, leader, and strong") decreased to 36% from 52%. The falling approval rating comes amid increasing opposition to the war in Iraq, the Democratic presidential debates, the investigation of evidence of weapons of mass destruction prior to the war in Iraq, and the growing awareness of the federal budget deficit. Additionally, a Feb. 19 CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll showed that in a hypothetical presidential contest, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry led Bush by 12 percentage points among likely voters, 55% to 43%, while North Carolina Sen. John Edwards led Bush by 10 points, 54% to 44%.
Sources: The Pew Research Center, "Democratic Primary Campaign Impresses Voters, Bush Personal Image Tumbles," Feb. 19; Gallup.com, Feb. 19

Bush Proposes Second-Class Status for Immigrants
According to the Washington Post, Bush's recently announced "temporary worker" program has been embraced by business groups but condemned as "stingy and impractical" by advocates for immigrants. The Bush program would make the 8 million undocumented immigrants currently in the U.S. eligible for temporary legal status, as long as they are employed. This status would not in most instances lead to obtaining citizenship or even permanent resident status. In fact, Bush asserted that most "temporary workers" would eventually have to leave the U.S. Susan F. Martin, an immigration expert at Georgetown University and former executive director of the U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform, expressed concern that, "we're going to be creating, under this type of legislation, a large number of basically indentured servants." Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean issued a statement warning that Bush's plan "would create a permanent underclass of service workers with second-class status." The Post went on to say that "business groups, made up of some of Bush's biggest financial backers, welcomed the plan as a way to create a stable work force and alleviate labor shortages for low-wage and dangerous jobs that Americans disdain in agriculture and the hotel, health, restaurant and construction industries." Conversely, labor advocates have warned that Bush's proposal, which requires workers to be sponsored by an employer in order to obtain legal status, would prevent them from complaining about job conditions out of fear of losing their sponsorship and being deported. Additionally, employers could use the threat of recruiting low-wage, legal immigrants against existing U.S. employees, preventing them from seeking better working conditions.
Sources: Washington Post, "Bush Proposes Legal Status for Immigrant Labor," Jan. 8, 2004; "Mexico's Fox Backs Bush Proposal on Immigration," Jan. 13, 2004.

Cheney Now Supports Bush Ban on Same-Sex Marriage
While Dick Cheney argued during the 2000 presidential campaign that the issue of gay marriage is best left to the states, according to the Denver Post, Cheney now says that "he would support a presidential push to ban same-sex marriage." Back in 2000, in a nationally televised debate with the Democratic vice-presidential candidate Joe Lieberman, Cheney stated, "the fact of the matter is we live in a free society, and freedom means freedom to everybody. And I think that means that people should be free to enter into any kind of relationship they want to enter into. It's really no one else's business in terms of trying to regulate or prohibit behavior in that regard." Cheney went on to say that, "I don't think there should necessarily be a federal policy in this area." There already is a federal policy in this area—the Defense of Marriage Act. Cheney is now saying that he is concerned that it "may not stand the test and therefore ... other measures, such as a constitutional amendment" are being examined. When Bush was recently asked about marriage rights for same-sex couples, he said that marriage should recognize only the union of a man and a woman, and that he may back a constitutional amendment or other federal action if the administration's lawyers feel it is necessary. Gay community leaders spoke against Cheney's recent statement, saying that Cheney "follows the line of the party of exclusion" and described the announcement as "election year pandering." Others felt that Cheney's reversal of position was a result of right-wing religious fundamentalists co-opting the Republican party.
Sources: Denver Post, "Cheney Would Support Bush in Ban on Same-Sex Marriage," Jan. 9, 2004; "VP's Gay Marriage Shift Called 'Slap in Face,'" Jan. 12, 2004.

Learn more about the radical right's plan to write discrimination into the Constitution.

Bush Seeks to Promote Marriage to the Tune of $1.5 Billion
The New York Times reports that Bush administration officials say they are planning an extensive election-year initiative to promote marriage, especially among low-income couples. For months, administration officials have worked with conservative groups on a proposal that would provide $1.5 billion for "training to help couples develop interpersonal skills that sustain 'healthy marriages.'" This proposal is believed to be aimed at appeasing "conservatives eager to see the federal government defend traditional marriage," especially after the recent court decision in Massachusetts. The Bush administration has faced pressure from conservatives. According to a Bush adviser, "this is a way for the president to address the concerns of conservatives and solidify his conservative base." The Times goes on to report that "several Christian advocacy groups are pressing [Bush] to go further and use the State of the Union address to champion a constitutional amendment prohibiting same-sex marriage." Many women's groups oppose marriage promotion programs as an intrusion on privacy. There is also concern that such programs ignore the risk of domestic violence and coerce women to marry. Under the Bush proposal, federal money could be used for advertising campaigns to publicize the value of marriage, instruction in marriage skills, and mentoring programs that use married couples as role models. Ronald T. Haskins, a Republican who has worked on Capitol Hill and in the Bush White House, stated that many conservatives are "very pleased" with the healthy marriage initiative.
Source: New York Times, "Bush Plans $1.5 Billion Drive for Promotion of Marriage," Jan. 14, 2004.

NOW President Kim Gandy expressed outrage at the diversion of dollars from welfare to marriage promotion saying, "What George W. Bush is telling poor women is, 'You don't need an education, you don't need a good-paying job—you just need a man.'" Learn more about the problem with the Bush administration's 'marriage promotion' agenda.

Bush Win on Overtime Means Workers Lose
Despite majority votes against proposed changes to U.S. overtime work rules in both the House and the Senate, the Bush administration is proceeding with the proposed changes. According to Reuters, Bush's proposal, which the administration intends to put into effect in a few months, "could cost more than 8 million Americans their overtime pay and result in companies forcing employees to work longer hours without compensation." Bush's Labor Department (DoL) proposed rules that would alter the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act back in March. Since then, both the House and Senate voted to block the DoL overtime exemptions, but the White House is not backing down. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, Bush is threatening to veto any legislation that would block his changes to the regulations, including critical spending bills. Congress believes that the administration is willing to provoke a funding crisis to retain its ability to cut overtime." Senator Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) remarked, "This is hugely disappointing to me, and an real blow to the working men and women of this country who depend on overtime pay." As Bush works to undo worker protections, NOW is fighting for women-friendly workplaces. Learn more.
Sources: Reuters, "Bush Said to Prevail on Overtime," Nov. 22, 2003; Chicago Sun-Times, "Opponents Drop Fight on New Overtime Rules," Nov. 23, 2003.

Bush & Co. Begin Dismantling Medicare; Choose HMOs and Drug Companies Over Seniors
White House-backed legislation that will "virtually remake Medicare" to the detriment of seniors, especially older women, was passed by slim partisan majorities in both the House and the Senate. According to the Washington Post, the existing Medicare program "guarantees the real choices most seniors care about—a choice of doctors and treatments." But the Medicare bill passed by Congress, which many feel is the first step towards the privatization of Medicare, "lines the pockets of powerful moneyed interests and leaves America's seniors out in the cold," says Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.). House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) goes on to say that Republican leaders are "leaving seniors at the mercy of HMOs," by increasing costs, including the costs for doctors' visits, and dismantling Medicare. While seniors have lost out on obtaining the kind of prescription drug coverage that they need and risk losing the system they trust and rely on for healthcare, special interests are set to benefit financially. "Republican leaders are giving millions of dollars in windfall profits to the pharmaceutical industry, banning the negotiation for lower drug prices, and giving billions of dollars as a slush fund for HMOs," Pelosi says. For the truth about Bush's changes to Medicare, read NOW's special report on the Medicare bill.
Sources: The Washington Post, "Medicare Monstrosity," Nov. 18, 2003. Associated Press, "After historic vote in House, it's up to Senate to determine fate of Medicare bill," Nov. 22, 2003. Associated Press, "Medicare Bill Moves Closer to Final Vote in Senate," Nov. 24, 2003. Office of the House Democratic Leader, Press Statement, Nov. 16, 2003.

The Public to Bush: "We Don't Believe You"
Several recent polls have shown that the public distrusts George W. Bush. A Nov. 13 poll by the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) found that a distinct minority of the public (only 42 percent) sees Bush as being "honest and frank," while 56 percent have doubts about what he says. In a Nov. 14 CBS News poll, 55 percent say that the Bush administration either was hiding important elements of what they knew about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq or was lying about it—among independents, it's 60 percent. Fully 71 percent of Democrats hold those views. According to the PIPA poll, 87 percent of the public believes that the administration portrayed Iraq as an imminent threat to the United States. But 58 percent of the public believes that the Bush administration did not have strong evidence that the U.S. was in imminent danger.
Sources: Knowledge Networks poll conducted for Program on International Policy Attitudes, Nov. 13, 2003; CBS News Poll, Nov. 14, 2003.

Bush Tells Congressional Democrats 'Don't Ask Questions'
The Washington Post reports that the Bush White House, "irritated by pesky questions from congressional Democrats about how the administration is using taxpayer money, has developed an efficient solution: it will not entertain any more questions from opposition lawmakers." In an email to the staff of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees, the director of the White House Office of Administration required that "all requests for information and materials be coordinated through the committee chairmen and be put in writing from the committee." This would prevent Democrats from getting any questions answered without the blessing of Republican committee chairmen. Even Norman Ornstein, of the conservative American Enterprise Institute, admitted that, "this is obviously an excuse to avoid providing information about some of the things the Democrats are asking for." The Post goes on to say that while this new policy may extend to other inquiries about the functioning of the Executive Office of the President, the immediate targets were the spending committees. For years these committees have "had a strong bipartisan tradition in which the majority party generally joined the minority in tough oversight of the administration."
Source: Washington Post, "White House Puts Limits on Queries From Democrats," Nov. 7, 2003.

Bush Popularity With Seniors, Independent Voters Plunges
George W. Bush's popularity has significantly declined since the beginning of summer and recent polls show that he fares even worse with seniors and independent voters—both critical groups for Bush when it comes time for re-election. A Sept. 28 - Oct. 1 poll conducted by CBS News and the New York Times showed that Bush's approval rating was a slim 51 percent. Among voters 65 and older, just 41 percent approve—his lowest among any age group. That was down from 63 percent in May, a fall of 22 points. According to the New York Times, "Analysts in both parties cite the economy, the stock market and the situation in Iraq as major factors in the slippage, along with more traditional concerns for older Americans like Medicare and the cost of prescription drugs." The Pew Research Center has also reported similar trends. As for independents, only 43 percent of independent voters approve of Bush compared with 51 percent overall. When asked about Bush's handling of foreign affairs, 44 percent overall approve, but only 38 percent of independents approve. He receives a 47 percent overall approval rate on the handling of the Iraq situation but only 40 percent of independents approve. On the handling of the economy, Bush receives just 37 percent overall approval and fares even worse among independents—only 28 percent of independents approve of Bush when it comes to the economy.
Sources: New York Times, "Bush's Popularity With Older Voters Is Seen as Slipping," Oct. 19, 2003; CBS News/New York Times Poll, Oct. 2, 2003; America's Future, "Public Opinion Watch," Oct. 13-19.

Study Finds Bush-Endorsed "Marriage Protection Week" Has Anti-Gay, Not Pro-Marriage Focus
Oct. 12-18, 2003, was declared "Marriage Protection Week" by a coalition of 29 conservative political and religious organizations including: the Christian Coalition, Focus on the Family, National Religious Broadcasters, and Concerned Women for America. On Oct. 3, George W. Bush issued an official proclamation in support of the week. While Bush stated in his proclamation that the week "provides an opportunity to focus our efforts on preserving the sanctity of marriage and on building strong and healthy marriages," a recent study by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF) Policy Institute revealed that there was "no focus whatsoever on building strong and healthy marriages." NGLTF Policy Institute goes on to report that all of the publicly announced and suggested activities focused exclusively on the supposed threat to the institution of marriage posed by civil marriage rights for same-sex couples. For example, "Marriage Protection Week" participants were asked to contact their U.S. Senators and Members of Congress to urge them to support an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would prohibit the same-sex civil marriages and the extension of benefits to same-sex couples. Sponsoring organizations also provided and urged the use of two model sermons—both of which contained inflammatory anti-gay rhetoric and were completely devoid of any references to building strong marriages. Also as part of the week, elected officials were asked to sign a pledge saying that they would not support even the most basic rights for same-sex couples such as hospital visitation or health insurance coverage. Learn more about same-sex marriage efforts and the attacks these efforts are facing from the radical right.
Sources: Presidential Proclamation, "Marriage Protection Week, 2003," Oct. 3, 2003. National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Policy Institute, "'Marriage Protection Week' Sponsors: Are They Really Interested in 'Building Strong and Healthy Marriages?'," Oct. 15, 2003.

Bush Plan for Uninsured Disputed By Nonpartisan Study
When confronted with the vast number of uninsured in the nation—the New York Times reports 43.6 million—Bush has argued that medical malpractice reform is key. "We must fix the problem of frivolous lawsuits against our doctors and hospitals," Bush asserted in an October 3 speech. But the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reported last year that "malpractice costs account for a very small fraction of total health care spending" and that even radical reform "would have a relatively small effect on total health plan premiums." The CBO went on to question Bush's "Association Health Plans," which would lump small businesses together so that they can buy group health insurance. According to the CBO, this plan would provide insurance to only about 600,000 additional people. Another recent study reported that "a third of the nation's workers without health insurance are employed by large companies" not the small businesses that the Bush plan focuses on. Get more information on other critical issues affecting women's health.
Sources: New York Times, "Workers Feel Pinch of Rising Health Costs," Oct. 22, 2003; Presidential Speech, Oct. 3, 2003; "Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate: Help Efficient, Accessible, Low Cost, Timely Congressional Budget Office, Healthcare (HEALTH) Act of 2002," Sept. 25, 2002; Congressional Budget Office, "Cost Estimate for HR 660, Small Business Health Fairness Act of 2003," June 16, 2003.

Bush Looks To Regional Media for More Favorable Coverage
The Washington Post reports that the Bush administration is displeased with the news coverage of the war in Iraq and has been increasing efforts to bypass the national media by reaching out directly to regional broadcasters. According to the Post, "Some in the national media say the White House strategy amounts to shopping for softer questioning." Regional reporters are often "a bit less prepared on how to focus the interview on questions and answers in the public interest and a bit more willing to accept what the White House position is on matters of controversy," says Mark Halperin, ABC News political director. The New York Times describes "an adminstration that bypassed the White House press corps to push a cheery message onto local news media about the American occupation in Iraq." The Times reports that, "White House advisers readily say they consider the regional news outlets more hospitable and less judgemental, and a better place to sell their wares." Learn more about NOW's media-monitoring project and efforts supporting diverse viewpoints in the media.
Sources: New York Times, "Trying to Bypass the Good-News Filter," Oct. 20, 2003; Washington Post, "Bush Courts Regional Media," Oct. 14, 2003.

Bush's Faith-Based Initiative Leads to Taxpayers Funding Discrimination
Further blurring the line between church and state, on Sept. 22 the Bush administration issued four new regulations allowing faith-based institutions to receive federal grants and contracts while discriminating in employment. According to The American-Statesman, the Department of Health and Human Services finalized regulations giving faith-based organizations access to nearly $20 billion in HHS grants, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development will make faith-based groups eligible to compete for $8 billion in HUD grants. Bush opted to implement his initiative through executive orders after being unable to persuade Congress of the initiative. David Noble, executive director of the National Stonewall Democrats, criticizes the regulations as anti-gay. In a Sept. 22 news release Noble states, "as long as Jerry Falwell believes that gays are going to hell, he can receive federal money to discriminate against them.
Sources: St. Louis Post-Dispatch, "Church, State and Bush," Sept. 26, 2003; The American-Statesman, "Faith-based Plans Advance With Little Fanfare," Oct. 3, 2003; Stonewall Democrats, "News Release: NSD Criticizes White House for Issuing Anti-Gay Regulations," Sept. 22, 2003.

Bush Administration to Phase In Intrusive Airport Security System
The Washington Post reports that under the direction of the Bush Administration, airlines will phase in a computer system next year that will assign a risk color code to every passenger on every flight in the United States. This new system would probe more deeply into each passenger's background, comparing personal information against criminal records and intelligence information. Coding will also be based in part on the passenger's city of departure, destination, traveling companions and date of ticket purchase. The new system, called Computer Assisted Passenger Pre-Screening System II (CAPPS II), has sparked so much controversy among both liberal and conservative groups that the Transportation Security Administration has struggled to get it going. "This system is going to be replete with errors," said Barry Steinhardt, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's technology and liberty program. "You could be falsely arrested. You could be delayed. You could lose your ability to travel."
Source: Washington Post, "Fliers to Be Rated for Risk Level," September 9, 2003.

Bush Blamed for Aug. 14 Blackout
Several Democratic presidential candidates attributed the Aug. 14 blackout that left major U.S. and Canadian cities in the dark to Bush's refusal to improve the nation's infrastructure. "It underscores a blackout in this administration on energy policies," said Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) "They have ignored the investment needs of our infrastructure in favor of a tax cut for the wealthy." The Associated Press reports that Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.) and Rep. Richard Gephardt (D-Mo.) pointed to the Bush administration and the Republican-controlled Congress' rejection of the 2001 Democratic proposal to modernize nation's electrical grid system as partly responsible for the 2003 blackout. According to the Washington Post, two of Bush's major financial supporters are executives of FirstEnergy Corp., a utility whose role in the blackout is currently being investigated by the Energy Department. Democrats are now questioning whether Bush's ties to the company affected his energy policies.
Sources: Associated Press, "Dems Blast Bush on Blackout," Aug. 16, 2003; Washington Post, "Utility Officers Gave to Bush," Mike Allen, Aug. 19, 2003

Bush Touts Opposition to Marriage Rights for Same-Sex Couples
At a July 30 White House news conference, George Bush announced that he intends to erect legal barriers to gay marriage. "I believe in the sanctity of marriage," Bush told reporters. "I believe a marriage is between a woman and a man, and I think we ought to codify that one way or the other." The White House is reportedly keeping watch on two state court cases in Massachusetts and New Jersey that could legalize same-sex unions, while lawyers are examining legal measures that would ensure that marriage is defined as a heterosexual union. When pressed on his view on homosexuality, Bush replied, "I am mindful that we're all sinners, and I caution those who may try to take the speck out of their neighbor's eye when they've got a log in their own...That doesn't mean that somebody like me needs to compromise on issues such as marriage."
Source: The Associated Press, "Bush says he is exploring legal steps to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman," Scott Lindlaw, July 31, 2003

Bush Administration Opposes Amendment Limiting Threats to Civil Liberties
The White House encouraged the Senate to remove an amendment from the defense spending bill that prohibits any research and development for the Terrorism Information Awareness (TIA) program—formerly known as the Total Information Awareness program. According to the Washington Times, the TIA program, which allows authorities to compile and sift through public and private records including details on financial documents, political and religious contributions, health problems, and travel documents, has been widely criticized by privacy advocates as a "supersnooping computer system that threatens civil liberties." The amendment, which ultimately passed the Senate, places restrictions on the implementation on the data-mining computer system that was supposedly designed by the Pentagon to track terrorists.
Sources: Washington Times, "White House Protests Cuts on Terrorist Data: Pentagon-designed Program Draws Wide Criticism as Civil Liberties Threat," Audrey Hudson, July 16, 2003; Washington Post, "Senate Votes to Deny Funding To Computer Surveillance Effort," Joshua Partlow, July 19, 2003

White House Intends to Veto Bill that Would Prohibit Expansion of Media Conglomerates
The New York Times reported that the Bush administration has threatened to veto a bill that recently passed the House Appropriations Committee which included an amendment that would "effectively block the [Federal Communications Commission] from enforcing a new rule that would permit broadcasters to own stations that reach more total households across the country than they do now." As a strong supporter of the FCC's efforts to loosen media ownership rules, the White House opposes any effort to constrain the federal commission's authority. Supporters of the amendment contend that blocking the enforcement of this new rule will "keep big media conglomerates form getting even bigger and perhaps from squelching smaller voices in the process," thereby protecting local concerns that could be silenced in the expansion of the major networks' ownership.
Source: New York Times, "House Panel Adds Voice to Opponents of Media Rule," Jacques Steinberg, July 17, 2003

Government's New Formula Reduces Student Financial Aid
The Los Angeles Times reports that under the federal government's new formula for determining financial need, an estimated 84,000 college students will no longer be eligible for federal financial assistance during the 2004-2005 school year. Additionally, the changes made to the formula used by the Department of Education are anticipated to decrease the Pell Grant program—the primary source of financial aid money for low-income students—by $270 million for 2004-2005, as well as reduce the amounts received by hundreds of thousands of other students. Although the formula used to determine students' financial need is adjusted annually, the recent changes have elicited outrage because they are based on tax figures from 2000 that do not reflect the struggling economy. The Times also indicated that the impact of the changes to the formula will be even greater than currently estimated because the same formula is used to calculate state and university-based financial aid.
Sources: Los Angeles Times, "Low-Income Students Lose Aid; Congressional Research Arm Says 84,000 College Students Will Lose Eligibility in 2004-2005," Rebecca Trounson, July 19, 2003

Bush Wants to Allow Federally-Funded Religious Groups to Discriminate Based on Religion and Sexual Orientation
The Washington Post reported that the Bush administration is encouraging Congress to "make it easier for federally funded religious groups to base their hiring decisions on a job candidate's religion and sexual orientation." In urging Congress to make this allowance, Bush is attempting to undermine laws that prohibit federally funded social service programs from discriminating on the basis of age gender, race, or religion. Although no federal law forbids discrimination in hiring on the basis of sexual orientation, some state and local laws to such effect do exist. Bush's position paper outlined a plan that would make federally funded religious groups accountable only to federal laws, and would also exempt them from federal anti-discrimination provisions that otherwise apply to federally funded social service programs.
Sources: Washington Post, "Bush Backs Religious Charities on Hiring: Hill is Urged to Ease Bias Rules on Groups that get U.S. Funds," Mike Allen & Alan Cooperman, June 25, 2003; Planet Out Network, "Bush Calls for Faith-Based Hiring Rights," June 25, 2003

Bush's "Clear Skies" Proposal Opposed by Health, Environmental and Consumer Groups
The U.S. Newswire reported that Bush’s "Clear Skies" legislation is being opposed by over 100 physician, health, environmental and consumer groups because it would create an increase in mercury pollution. The Clear Skies proposal, considered to be the cornerstone of Bush’s environmental policy, is aimed at reducing emissions from power plants, but has been criticized for failing to address carbon dioxide emissions and other pollutants adequately. According to Reuters, a competing bill drafted by a bipartisan group of moderate senators would reduce sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, and mercury emissions from power plants sooner and with greater efficacy than the Clear Skies plan. The U.S. Newswire indicated that 8% of U.S. women of childbearing age currently have unsafe mercury levels – which puts over 300,000 children born each year at risk of mercury poisoning. Bush’s plan reportedly would delay the initiation of mercury reductions for another seven years, postpone full implementation until 2018, and ultimately would reduce pollution only a fraction of what will be achieved by current law.
Sources: Reuters, "EPA Touts Benefits of Bush Power Plant Emission Curbs," Chris Baltimore, July 2, 2003; U.S. Newswire, "More Mercury Pollution Allowed Under Bush Plan, Says Mercury Policy Project; 100 Groups Write to Oppose Legislation," July 8, 2003

Facing Criticism on Education Reform, Bush Reintroduces School Voucher Proposal
Having based much of his 2000 campaign platform on a school voucher program that was dismantled in Congress, Bush ultimately settled for his"leave no child behind" legislation mandating school accountability standards. According to the Associated Press, Bush is now facing criticism for "breaking his promise to provide state and local officials with all the money the legislation promised to fulfill the new mandate." Recently, perhaps in response to such criticism, Bush announced that he intends to push Congress to pass legislation that would establish a $75 million school choice incentive plan for several cities in 2004. Voucher plans have numerous critics, including teachers unions, who contend that they "would drain money from public schools and too often end up supporting religious schools," reports the Associated Press.
Source: Associated Press, "Bush Pushing for Vouchers at D.C. Schools," Jennifer Loven, July 1, 2003

Bush Defaults on Pledge to Expand Opportunities for National Service
After vowing to expand AmeriCorps' community service opportunities by 50 percent in his 2002 State of the Union address and in several other public appearances, Bush now appears to be standing idly as the domestic volunteer program faces devastating cuts. Despite commending AmeriCorps repeatedly, Bush has failed to intervene to block cutbacks to the program that will result in the elimination of funding for perhaps hundreds of long-established programs that are assets to communities across the country, the Washington Post reports. Reneging on his pledge to increase the AmeriCorps ranks from 50,000 to 75,000, Bush requested $40 million less in AmeriCorps grants for fiscal 2004 than the previous year. The New York Times commented that this is "yet another instance where the president's actions have not matched his 'compassionate conservative' rhetoric." According to the Washington Post, the White House also refuses to commit to a $200 million supplemental spending measure that will enable AmeriCorps to continue to function at its present level.
Sources: Washington Post, "AmeriCorps Officials Are Told of Cutbacks," David S. Broder, June 14, 2003; New York Times, "The Spirit of Service Betrayed," June 18, 2003; Washington Post, "Senators Try to Stem AmeriCorps Cuts," Dana Milbank, June 19, 2003.

Bush Administration Moves to Dismantle National Head Start Program, Violates Advocates' First Amendment Rights
In a move ardently opposed by Head Start teachers and parents, Bush has proposed turning Head Start—the national non-profit organization that works to meet the educational and health needs of one million at-risk American children—over to individual states. Leaders and members of the National Head Start Association contend that the states, which are already cutting much-needed services due to inadequate finances, are not equipped to fill Head Start's role. Advocates of the Head Start program reportedly maintain that Bush's plan will result in "a hodgepodge of inconsistent and untested state government programs." In an unprecedented attempt to silence these critiques and others, the Bush administration reportedly sent a letter to all Head Start programs threatening them with legal action and the loss of grant funding if they voiced disapproval of the plan. In response to this letter, the National Head Start Association filed a civil lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for infringing upon its right to free speech.
Sources: PR Newswire, "Head Start Advocates: Bush Administration is Using 'Scare Tactics' to Silence Critics of Dismantling Head Start," May 28, 2003; PR Newswire, "Bush Administration Sued for Attack on 1st Amendment rights of Head Start Instructors and Parents/Volunteers," June 11, 2003; Palm Beach Post, "Bush Would Hold Back Head Start," Elisa Cramer, June 13, 2003.

EPA Deletes Section of Report Rather than Include White House's Manipulation of Scientific Evidence
According to the New York Times, an Environmental Protection Agency report scheduled for release in late June will not include a lengthy section that described health and ecological risks from rising global temperatures due to uncorroborated alterations by the White House. The Times reported that administration officials attempted to replace information from a White House-commissioned 2001 National Research Council report that identified human contributions such as smokestack and tail-pipe emissions as at least partly responsible for global warming with an American Petroleum Institute-financed study that questioned these findings. The Times reported that an internal EPA memorandum noted that the EPA decided to delete the entire section on climate change rather than "selectively (filter) science to suit policy" because the administration's alterations "no longer accurately represents scientific consensus on climate change." According to Mark Van Putten, president of the National Wildlife Federation, this attempt to minimize reports of environmental risks—the second attempt by the administration to downplay global warming in official documents this year—represents "the administration's readiness to reject or spin scientific findings on crucial environmental issues that do not suit the White House's political agenda."
Sources: New York Times, "Report by the E.P.A. Leaves Out Data on Climate Change," Andrew C. Revkin with Katharine Q. Seelye, June 19, 2003; National Wildlife Federation, "EPA Ditches Climate Change in Environment Report, Resists White House Pressure," June 19, 2003.

Department of Justice Backtracks on Decision to Ban Annual Gay Pride Event
Several days after reports that the Justice Department would ban an annual Gay Pride Month event from taking place at its headquarters, the Washington Post reported that the event will be allowed, but not with the agency's sponsorship. The New York Times initially reported that the employee event, an annual tradition at the Justice Department since the late 1990's, was prohibited from taking place this year because the White House has not formally recognized Gay Pride Month (despite the official acknowledgment of events such as Leif Erikson Day and Save Your Vision Week). The New York Times further reported that the cancellation may have been prompted by an outcry from conservative groups when Deputy Attorney General Larry Thompson spoke at the event last year. In response to reports of the event's cancellation, the New York Times indicated that gay rights leaders claimed that this is the "first time a federal agency has forced the cancellation of a gay pride event." This demonstration of the Bush administration's policy supposedly aimed at not "politicizing people's sexual orientation" has gay rights leaders fearing that other events sponsored by DOJ Pride or the very existence of the group may now be threatened.
Source: New York Times, "Justice Dept. Bans Event by Gay Staff," Eric Lichtblau, June 6, 2003; Washington Post, "Justice to Let Staff Honor Gay Pride," Brian Faler, June 11, 2003

New Bush Administration Policy Threatens U.S. Wilderness Areas
The Chicago Tribune reported early in June that a new Bush administration policy which ceases the assessment of the Bureau of Land Management's land holdings for possible wilderness classification was revealed in a recent legal settlement with Utah. The policy—which blatantly disregards consistent public support for protecting pristine public lands—reverses Clinton-era efforts to provide the highest level of protection possible to public lands such as the canyons of Comb Ridge in Utah that include ancient Indian cliff dwellings, giant glaciers in Alaska, and some of New Mexico's vast desert grasslands. According to the Tribune, "the administration's emphasis on oil and gas development" in concert with Bush's new policy could result in wells being drilled "relatively quickly in pristine areas." The Tribune quoted Michael Matz, the executive director of the Campaign for America's Wilderness as stating, "Essentially, what this administration is saying is 'no more wilderness'."
Source: Chicago Tribune, "U.S. Halts Classifying Lands as Wilderness," Judith Graham, June 2, 2003

Administration Promotes Privatization of Medicare
As Congress prepares to reform Medicare legislation, the Bush administration has proposed a plan that uses prescription drug benefits to induce older Americans to enroll in private health plans instead of remaining in the government-run Medicare program. According to the New York Times, the main tenets of this initiative involve providing Medicare patients with "only modest drug benefits, while those who join private plans would be rewarded with much more extensive coverage." Critics of the plan, including most Democrats and some influential Republicans, argue that this arrangement is a veiled first step towards privatizing Medicare and that it will work to the detriment of elderly individuals living in rural areas where private health plans are less accessible. There are also concerns that this plan could further restrict patients' choices of doctors and hospitals.
Source: New York Times, "Bush Drug Proposal in Medicare Plan Faces a Stiff Battle," Robert Pear and Robin Toner, May 21, 2003

White House Supports Bill That Would Result in Forced Overtime Without Pay for More Employees
Current labor standards have kept the 40-hour workweek from ballooning by requiring employers to pay overtime to certain employees when they are required to work more than 40 hours in a week. This may soon be gutted with the blessing of the White House. Bush has indicated he intends to sign a bill which would purportedly give employers the ability to choose between overtime pay and comp time. However, these bills could be used by employers as a way to avoid paying overtime to workers by pressuring "workers to take comp time instead of overtime, perhaps by awarding raises or promotions to those who take comp time ... and to steer overtime to those who chose comp time." In addition, the bills would allow employers—not employees—to determine when the comp time can be taken in order to not "unduly disrupt" operations. The employer could postpone payment for as long as 13 months.
Source: New York Times, "Bill Offers Option of Compensatory Time," Steven Greenhouse, May 6, 2003

Pentagon Proposal Concerns Labor Activists, Environmentalists
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld submitted to Congress a proposal that would overhaul the Department of Defense's civil service, as well as eliminate a number of regulations affecting department operations and outlays. Critics of the proposal are concerned that Rumsfeld’s plans will "strip… [the] most basic protections" from a third of the federal civilian workforce and "would mark the end of the civil service system." Rumsfeld’s proposal would allow the defense department to "waive or modify union rights and appeal rights" for employees facing disciplinary action and to disregard Office of Personnel Management personnel rules by "invoking national security reasons." The secretary of defense could also invoke national security to bypass regulations that require the Department of Defense to purchase U.S.-made products. In addition, the proposal exempts the Department of Defense from environmental rules that would affect 23 million acres of land.
Sources: Washington Post, "Defense Bigwigs Push for Pentagon's Civil Service Overhaul," Stephen Barr, May 7, 2003; Chicago Tribune, "Wide Change Proposed in U.S. Military," Michael Kilian, April 15, 2003; Campaign for America's Future

Bush Proposal Would Have Given CIA and Military New Domestic Powers
The New York Times reported that—according to at least one CIA official and one Congressional official—a proposal was put forward by the Bush administration that would have widened the domestic powers of the CIA and the Pentagon. The plan, which was defeated "at least temporarily," would have given the CIA and Pentagon the authority to request information, such as credit card and phone records, about people in the United States. Opponents of the measure expressed concern that the CIA and military would "have much freer reign" than the FBI, which already has the authority to obtain such information but is bound by protective guidelines that would not apply to the CIA and the Pentagon. According to the American Civil Liberties Union's Legislative Counsel, Timothy Edgar, such "sweeping and secret policing powers" are "dangerous and un-American."
Source: New York Times, "Broad Domestic Role Asked for C.I.A. and the Pentagon," Eric Lichtblau and James Risen, May 2, 2003

Administration Backs Bill to Protect Gun Manufacturers and Dealers from Lawsuits
Pending passage in the Senate, Bush plans to sign into law a bill that would exempt gun manufacturers and sellers from lawsuits, including pending lawsuits from victims of "gun crimes." Opponents of the bill say that the new legal roadblocks would allow gun manufacturers to avoid lawsuits for negligence such as "[selling] weapons to felons" or "[misplacing] caches of weapons."
Sources: Washington Post, "Gun Firms on Verge of Winning," Jim VandeHei, May 4, 2003

White House Spokesperson Calls Gay-Bashing Senator an "Inclusive Man"
Following Sen. Rick Santorum's, R-Pa., comments equating homosexuality with polygamy and incest, the Bush administration praised Santorum as an "inclusive man." In an interview with the Associated Press, Santorum stated, "If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual (gay) sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything." Santorum, who also blamed feminists and liberals for hurting American families, is the third highest-ranking Republican in the Senate leadership.
Sources: San Francisco Chronicle, "Gay Uproar May Not Hurt Senator," Marc Sandalow, April 23, 2003

Administration Attempts to Stop Lawsuit Against Cheney by Employing "Unusual Legal Maneuver"
The Bush administration attempted to employ an "unusual" legal maneuver to circumvent a lower court ruling that would force Vice President Dick Cheney to release information about his meetings with energy industry representatives in formulating the White House's energy policy. The policy that was formulated by the task force and endorsed by the Bush administration supported a number of initiatives favored by the energy industry and opposed by environmentalists. The administration has requested that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia intervene following U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan's decision allowing the Sierra Club and Judicial Watch to peer into some of Cheney's energy policy task force documents. Members of the federal appeals court expressed doubts about the administration's legal maneuvering. According to the senior member on the three-judge panel, "it was hard to see why the case merited preemptive action."
Source: Washington Post, "Judges Question U.S. Move in Cheney Suite," Henri E. Cauvin, April 18, 2003

Bush Administration Wants to Include Juvenile Offenders, Adult Arrestees in DNA Database
In a move that angered civil libertarians, the White House has proposed expanding the FBI's national DNA database to include profiles from adults who have been arrested but not convicted and juvenile offenders. Currently, only DNA profiles of convicted adults can be placed in the FBI's DNA database. Critics of Bush's proposal are concerned that expanding the database would threaten privacy rights. Civil libertarians also expressed concern that the government may want to use the DNA samples to search for genetic markers—such as height and hair color—which are being identified by researchers.
Source: USA Today, "White House Seeks to Expand DNA Database," Richard Willing, April 16, 2003

U.S. Government Intends to Jail Asylum Seekers from Some Muslim Nations
The Bush administration announced that it will jail asylum seekers from "dozens of mostly Muslim nations" while immigration officials verify their claims of persecution in their home countries. Although Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge justified the decision as a "prudent and temporary measure," civil rights and immigration advocacy groups expressed concern about the new regulations. "It seems unfair to put people in jail who are escaping prosecution and who have done nothing wrong just because they are from certain countries," said Council on American-Islamic Relations Spokesperson Ibrahim Hooper. According to Hooper, many asylum applications can take years.
Source: Washington Post, "Rights Groups Protest Jailing of Asylum Seekers," John Mintz, March 18, 2003

Bush Wants Judicial Filibusters Banned After Failing to Get His Way With Estrada Nomination
Following the failure of Senate Republicans to end the Democratic filibuster of Miguel Estrada's nomination, Bush called for a ban on judicial filibusters, as well as a mandatory vote on every court nomination that he sends to the Senate. Democrats noted that Republicans have blocked numerous judicial nominees in the past, particularly those nominated by Clinton, from getting a floor vote.
Source: Associated Press, "Bush Calls for End to Judicial Filibusters," Jesse J. Holland, March 11, 2003

Changes to Medicaid, Medicare Would Be a Boon to Industry, Detrimental to Beneficiaries
The Bush administration recently released a proposal to make sweeping changes to Medicaid and Medicare. Under the plan, states would have more latitude in determining which benefits to provide to beneficiaries. The plan would also shift more responsibility from the government to private insurers. Critics have warned that while the reforms would provide individuals with more choices, they "would also mean less security, fewer guaranteed benefits and more financial risk for beneficiaries." Critics have also noted that health insurance and pharmaceutical companies, traditional Republican donors, stand to "reap huge profits" from Bush's proposal.
Sources: New York Times, "Bush Proposes Major Changes in Health Plans," Robin Toner and Robert Pear, Feb. 24, 2003
Washington Post, "Bush Plan a Boon to Drug Companies," Mike Allen, March 5, 2003

Bush Supports House Vote to Ban Therapeutic Cloning
Bush congratulated the House for passing a bill banning all human cloning—including therapeutic cloning, which many scientists hope will eventually yield cures for diseases like Alzheimer's and Parkinson's. According to one bioethicist, the vote "reflects just one thing: the desire to get legal status for an embryo. This is the back door way to get it done." Bush, who opposes abortion, has previously expressed his opposition to human cloning for the purposes of research and reproduction. The bill now moves to the Senate, where a similar ban failed last year.
Sources: Associated Press, "House Passes Ban on All Human Cloning, Now Moves to Senate," Janelle Carter, Feb. 28, 2003
Boston Globe, "Outlawing Science," Ellen Goodman, March 6, 2003

Bush Administration Seeks to Exempt Pentagon from Environmental Laws
The White House requested Congress to exempt the Pentagon from environmental laws pertaining to air pollution, toxic waste dumps, and endangered species. The Defense Department claims that these exemptions are necessary to enable proper training and readiness activities for the probable war in Iraq. However, Christine Todd Whitman, of the Environmental Protection Agency, testified before the Senate, "I don't believe that there is a training mission anywhere in the country that is being held up or not taking place because of environmental protection regulation."
Source: Washington Post, "Environmental Exemptions Sought," Eric Pianin, March 6, 2003

Proposed Budget Shifts Social Service Programs to States
Advocates for the poor have expressed concern that Bush's 2004 budget shifts responsibility for social services programs to cash-strapped state governments. Under the Bush budget, states would shoulder increasing responsibility for programs such as Head Start, Medicare and Section 8 vouchers. Advocates worry that as the federal government transfers more power to the states, it could also pull back on funding for these programs, a scenario that could lead states to cut back on services for the needy.
Source: Los Angeles Times, "Bush Proposes Shifting a Bigger Share of Programs for the Poor to the States," Richard Simon, Feb. 5, 2003

Education Programs Will Fare Poorly under Bush's Proposals
The No Child Left Behind Act and other education programs have been dealt a blow by Bush’s proposed budget, which underfunds the act by almost $6 billion. Although the budget does increase funding for poor schools and for special education by $2 billion, most of the increase comes from the elimination of approximately 45 education programs, such as rural education and dropout prevention programs. Teachers and school administrators have expressed concern that the lack of funding for the No Child Left Behind Act will make it impossible to implement the law.
Source: New York Times, "The President’s Budget Proposal: Education," Diana Jean Schemo, Feb. 5, 2003

Changes to Labor Law May Result in Unpaid Overtime for More Workers
Labor Department officials announced that they will review provisions in the Fair Labor Standards Act that regulate overtime, potentially forcing more workers "to work longer hours without overtime pay," according to the Associated Press. The administration indicated that it intends to make more lower-paid workers eligible for overtime, it also signaled it intends to simplify many job descriptions, which could move many higher-paid workers out of the category eligible for overtime. Unions and lawmakers have expressed concern that the administration's review may lead to an overall decrease in the number of workers eligible for overtime pay.
Source: Associated Press, "Labor Law Revisions Could End Overtime for Higher-Income Workers," Leigh Strope, Feb. 1, 2003

Bush Abandons Federal Pay Parity, Proposes Changes to Federal Workers' Raise System
The Bush administration abandoned the tradition of "pay parity" for the second year in a row, proposing larger average pay raises for the military (4.1 percent) than for civilian employees (2 percent) in its 2004 budget. Bush also unveiled a "pay for performance" proposal, which would create a $500 million fund for performance-based raises for civilian federal workers. Federal employee unions and Democratic lawmakers immediately objected, characterizing the plan as "another attempt by the ideological zealots at the White House to reward only those workers who adhere to their partisan political agenda." Lawmakers from both parties have called for Bush to close the gap.
Sources: Reuters, "Bush Proposes Performance-Based Raises for Workers," Adam Entous, Jan. 26, 2003; Washington Post, "Bush Plan for Military and Civilian Raises Ignores 'Pay Parity'," Christopher Lee, Feb. 4, 2003

Bush Race-Baits on Affirmative Action, Files Brief in Supreme Court Affirmative Action Case
In a race-baiting speech using inflammatory—and false—accusations of "quotas," Bush announced his administration is filing a brief with the Supreme Court challenging the University of Michigan's use of racial preferences in admissions. Although White House spokepersons claim that the move is narrowly tailored to apply only to the specific policies at the University of Michigan, legal scholars across the political spectrum agreed that the administration's justification could imperil affirmative action programs throughout the nation. Civil rights groups sharply criticized Bush's decision and questioned his commitment to civil rights, particularly since the administration did not need to take a position in this case and had not taken a position at the appeals court level. The White House's decision follows closely on the heels of Sen. Trent Lott's racist comments and Bush's delayed criticism of the senator's words.
Source: New York Times, "Bush and Affirmative Action, Constitutional Questions; President Faults Race Preferences as Admission Tool," Neil A. Lewis, Jan. 16, 2003; Washington Post, "Bush Joins Admissions Case Fight," Amy Goldstein and Dana Milbank, Jan. 16, 2003

Administration Intends to Give Federal Aid to Build or Renovate Places of Worship
The Bush administration has unveiled a proposal to change existing regulations to allow religious groups to compete for federal money that could be used to pay part of the cost of building and renovating houses of worship that also provide social services. Federal funding could not exceed the percentage of the building used for social services. Nevertheless, according to legal scholars, it would be nearly impossible to draw a line between religious and other services in a building. In addition, there is no provision for a refund if a church stopped providing those services after the building was completed. Civil liberties groups and legal scholars decried Bush's plans, arguing that the new regulations risk running afoul of the separation of church and state.
Source: New York Times, "Bush Plans to Let Religious Groups Get Building Aid," Eric Lichtblau, Jan. 23, 2003

Bush Ruling Imperils Wetlands, Other Bodies of Water
A recent Bush administration decision to redefine what bodies of water are covered under the Clean Water Act could spell disaster for almost 20 million acres of swamps, bogs and other bodies of water. According to administration officials, the move is merely intended to ensure compliance with a Supreme Court ruling. However, environmentalists charge the administration's directive goes "beyond the court ruling to adopt industry approaches toward weakening the act."
Source: Associated Press, "Administration Outlines New Approach for Regulating Wetlands, Other Water Bodies," John Heilprin, Jan. 11, 2003

Bush & Co. Deny Federal Airport Screeners the Right to Organize
The Bush administration has announced that it will deny federal airport screeners the right to unionize. According to James Loy, head of the Transportation Security Administration, "Mandatory collective bargaining is not compatible with the flexibility required to wage the war against terrorism." The American Federation of Government Employees has denounced the administration's stance as illegal. The union, which reportedly has already received complaints from screeners, has also indicated that it will file suit on behalf of the airport screeners.
Source: Los Angeles Times, "White House Steps Up Labor Fight, Denies Screeners Right to Organize," Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Jan. 10, 2003

Bush Fails to Push His "Compassion" Agenda
Despite the fact that "compassionate conservatism" was a key element of Bush's election promises, according to a Washington Post article, two years into his presidency, Bush has done very little to help those in need. Current and former advisers charged that while Bush has been very effective at getting tax cuts and increases in defense spending approved, he has not pursued his so-called "compassion" agenda with the same zeal. With the exception of his education bill, all items in Bush's "compassion" agenda, including prescription drug coverage, the expansion of the AmeriCorps, loosening immigration regulations and increasing the availability of low-income housing, have stalled.
Source: Washington Post, "President's Compassionate Agenda Lags; Bush's Legislative Record for Disadvantaged Wanting," Dana Milbank, Dec. 26, 2002

New Environmental Rule Decried as Ploy to Allow Development in National Parks and Forests
In what critics have denounced as another ploy to open national parks and forests to development, Bush & Co. established new regulations to resolve right of access disputes on federal lands. Conservation groups and Democratic lawmakers oppose the new rule, which they fear will allow states to prevent the designation of public lands as wilderness and to make the land available for drilling, logging and mining.
Source: New York Times, "U.S. Issues Rule Over Right-of-Way Disputes on Federal Lands in the West," Katherine Q. Seelye, Dec. 25, 2002

Bush Can't Make His Mind up on Trent Lott, Continues to Stand by Extremist Senator, Even as Critics Say Lott's Apology Is Not Enough
Pushed by the growing outcry against Senate Republican leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.), George W. Bush belatedly criticized the senator's racist and sexist comments after initially supporting Lott. At a Dec. 5 birthday party for Senator Strom Thurmond (R-S.C.), Lott—slated to regain the position of Senate majority leader in a few weeks—praised Thurmond for running for president on a pro-segregation ticket in 1948, saying that if the country had voted for Thurmond, "we wouldn't have had all these problems." Lott, who made similar remarks previously, later issued an apology. A growing number of commentators and advocacy groups have sharply criticized Lott and demanded he resign from his leadership position. Although Bush recently signaled that he will not intervene on Lott's behalf if Senate Republicans force him out of his leadership position, Bush also indicated that he does not believe Lott should step down. White House spokesperson Ari Fleischer said Bush "has confidence in [Lott] as Republican leader, unquestionably" and believes Lott's apology should lay the issue to rest.
Sources: Washington Post, "President Decries Lott's Comments," Dana Milbank and Jim VandeHei, Dec. 13, 2002; Associated Press, "Lott Apologizes for Thurmond Comments, But Criticism Mounts," Jim Abrams, Dec. 1, 2002

With the Elections Over, Bush & Co. Abandon Plans to Provide Prescription Drug Coverage to All Seniors
After Bush, as well as many Republican congressional candidates, made election-year promises to provide prescription drug coverage for the elderly, the administration unveiled the outlines of an extremely limited plan to provide prescription drug coverage to poor seniors. Many lawmakers, including Democrats and Republicans, favor a plan that will provide assistance to all seniors, similar to a bill that passed in the Republican-controlled House. Advocates for the elderly and lawmakers have already come out against Bush's plan.
Source: Washington Post, "White House Considering New Drug Plan," Amy Goldstein, Dec. 8, 2002

Bush's Faith-Based Legislation Discriminates against Gays, Infringes on Separation of Church and State
Bush tirelessly pushed for passage of the Charity Aid, Recovery and Empowerment (CARE) Act of 2002, one of the key components of his faith-based initiative. There are concerns the act would exempt religious groups operating federally-funded programs from equal employment opportunity laws, infringe on church/state separation and jeopardize hard-won civil rights protections. A compromise version of the bill, which was approved in the House, died in the 107th Senate, but it is expected that the bill's sponsors will push for its passage again in the new session.
Sources: Church & State, "President Bush's 'faith-based' initiative fails in Senate," Dec. 1, 2002; People for the American Way, "Government Funding for Religion ("Charitable Choice")"

Bush Approves Bonus Payments for Political Appointees, Denies Civil Servants Pay Raise Sought by Congress
The Bush administration recently made public that it has reinstated the system of cash bonuses for political appointees, making nearly 2,100 federal employees eligible for the bonus payments. Clinton suspended the bonus payments for appointees after concluding that former President Bush had abused the system when political appointees received approximately $400,000 in bonuses after the 1992 elections. The move comes only days after Bush—arguing that "civilian pay increases in 2003 would interfere with our nation's ability to pursue the war on terrorism"—approved a 3.1 percent raise for federal workers, instead of the 4.1 percent raise proposed by a bipartisan group of senators and representatives. (A 4.1 percent raise would have brought civilian workers' raises in line with those approved for the military.) In a letter to Bush, 80 lawmakers strongly criticized the move, arguing that "Bush is cutting the pay of middle- and lower-income employees while paying lucrative bonuses to his top political appointees."
Sources: Associated Press, "Bush Restores Political Cash Bonuses," Scott Lindlaw, Dec. 5, 2002; Washington Post, "Bush Limits Federal Pay Increase to 3.1 Percent," Stephen Barr and Mike Allen, Nov. 30, 2002

Bush Again Refuses to Act on Global Warming
Following an administration-sponsored climate change conference, Bush administration officials argued—despite acknowledging that global warming poses a threat—that the nation should not rush into "long term solutions that might hurt the economy." Environmentalists fear that the administration may have set up the conference as an attempt to camouflage its torpor in addressing global warming and its contempt for mandatory emission restrictions stipulated by agreements such as the Kyoto Protocol. Bush also indicated that research on global warming should extend for another decade before emission restrictions are made mandatory. This request was denounced as unnecessary by many environmental groups, who argue there is "more than enough scientific data" available for the United States—widely acknowledged as the world's largest polluter—to shape its global warming policy.
Source: Washington Post, "Group Meets on Global Warming," Eric Pianin, Dec. 4, 2002

Administration Weakens Environmental Protections in National Forests
Changes proposed by the Bush administration to the rules governing the usage of national forests would eliminate requirements that ensure the survival of native animal species. The timber and paper industries applauded Bush's proposal, while environmentalists decried the plans as yet another gift to industry. The proposed changes—which represent Bush's second attempt since the Nov. 5 elections to curtail environmental protections—were announced without any input from a scientific panel, which every administration from Reagan to Clinton convened when reviewing national forest management rules.
Source: Los Angeles Times, "Wildlife Protections Lost in New Forest Rules," Elizabeth Shogren, Nov. 28, 2002

Security Bill Keeps Goodies for Bush Allies
Bush was instrumental in the defeat of a Democratic-sponsored amendment to remove several provisions from the Homeland Security bill that Democratic senators labeled "'special interest' favors." Bush's last-minute calls to undecided senators ultimately tipped the balance against the amendment, which would have eliminated such boons to business as setting limits to the legal liability of a specific vaccine manufacturer, airport security equipment manufacturers and airport security providers and allowing companies that move offshore to evade U.S. taxes to bid for homeland security contracts.
Source: Washington Post, "Amendment to Homeland Security Bill Defeated," Helen Dewar, Nov. 19, 2002

Gay Students Discharged from U.S. Army Language School
The Bush administration's military discharged nine students, including seven students of Arabic, from the Army's main language training center because they violated the "don't ask, don't tell" policy by identifying themselves as gay. The dismissals from the Defense Language Institute come at a time when the U.S. government needs more employees proficient in Arabic as it devotes resources to fighting terrorist groups in the Middle East and to improving relations with countries in the region. "This puts prejudice ahead of national security," said Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.).