Most Iowa caucus-goers head home after the presidential candidate selection, but hard-core activists stick around to elect county convention delegates and consider resolutions for the party platform. If you bring a resolution to your precinct caucus, you have a good chance of getting it approved.

Little-known fact for those who plan to exercise this option: platform resolutions are supposed to be written in a different format from other political resolutions you may have read.

Ten years ago today, President George W. Bush signed a bill called the “United and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism,” better known as the PATRIOT Act. It’s a good time to reflect on the law’s impact as well as how the Iowans in Congress voted on its provisions over the last decade.

Iowa state troopers arrested at least 30 people outside the state Capitol building late last night in order to break up a protest by people supporting the Occupy Wall Street movement across the country.

UPDATE: Monday evening’s protest in Des Moines didn’t lead to any arrests. Further details are below.

The Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur, which ended Saturday evening, delayed this weekend’s open thread. One of the most meaningful parts of the Yom Kippur tradition is the yizkor memorial service. In that spirit, I have been thinking about three hugely influential Americans who died during the past week.

Hours before three controversial PATRIOT Act provisions were set to expire, Congress approved a bill extending the provisions until June 1, 2015. At the Open Congress blog, Donny Shaw summarized the legal points:

They include the authority for “roving” wiretaps that allows the government to monitor computers that may occasionally be used by suspected terrorists, the “tangible records provision” that requires banks, telecoms and libraries to hand over any customer information the government requests without being allows to inform the customer, and the “lone wolf” provision allowing the government to track terrorists acting independently of any foreign power or organization.

Congress approved a three-month extension of those provisions in February. The bill that just passed was a compromise between House Republican and Senate Democratic leaders who disagreed on how far to extend the powers. A House bill would have extended the “lone wolf” authority permanently and the others for six and a half years. A Senate bill would have extended all three powers until the end of 2013.

Many senators have complained that the PATRIOT Act provisions in question undermine civil liberties, but few had the stomach to filibuster the bill when the Senate considered a motion to proceed on May 23. Iowans Tom Harkin and Chuck Grassley were among the 74 senators voting for considering the PATRIOT Act extension (roll call). Just eight senators voted to filibuster this bill; another 18 senators did not vote on the motion to proceed.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid used a legislative maneuver to block various amendments seeking to reform the PATRIOT Act from receiving votes on the floor yesterday. The Senate voted on just two amendments, both submitted by Republican Rand Paul. Motions to table those amendments passed with overwhelming majorities, 91 to 4 and 85 to 10. Both Harkin and Grassley voted to table Paul’s amendments.

Harkin and Grassley disagreed on final passage of the bill, however, as they did when the last extension came to a vote in February. Grassley was among 72 senators voting for the four-year PATRIOT Act extension; Harkin was among the 23 voting against it (roll call).

The bill then went to the House for consideration. After some debate it passed on Thursday evening by a vote of 250 to 153. The roll call shows that Democrat Leonard Boswell (IA-03) and Republicans Tom Latham (IA-04) and Steve King (IA-05) all voted yes, while Democrats Bruce Braley (IA-01) and Dave Loebsack (IA-02) voted no, with the majority of their caucus. Quite a few House members crossed party lines on this bill; 31 Republicans voted no, while 54 Democrats voted yes. Iowa’s House delegation split the same way in February when the three-month PATRIOT Act extension passed.

After the House voted to concur with the Senate amendment to the bill, the PATRIOT Act extension went to President Barack Obama’s desk. Because the president is in France, White House officials said Obama signed the bill before midnight using some kind of “autopen” machine. That’s the first I ever heard of that technology.

After the jump I’ve posted a memo from Grassley on the PATRIOT Act extension, which the Republican senator’s office sent to the media on Thursday evening. At this writing I have not seen press releases on this vote from Harkin, Braley, Loebsack, Boswell, Latham or King.

Glenn Greenwald wrote a good post on the cynicism of Democrats who have been using the Republican talking points of yesteryear to browbeat colleagues into rubber-stamping the PATRIOT Act extension.

UPDATE: Added King’s press release on this vote after the jump.

Governor Terry Branstad announced some important personnel decisions in the past few days, naming former State Representative Libby Jacobs to chair the Iowa Utilities Board and three new members of the Board of Regents, including Bruce Rastetter.

Follow me after the jump for more on those and other Branstad administration appointments.

UPDATE: On March 1 President Barack Obama named Branstad to co-chair the Council of Governors, “established by the National Defense Authorization Act in 2008 to strengthen further partnership between the Federal and State governments as it pertains to national security.” Branstad will serve a two-year term as co-chair.

SECOND UPDATE: Branstad announced more than 200 appointments to state boards and commissions on March 2. Bleeding Heartland covered the four appointees to the Environmental Protection Commission here; all have ties to large agribusiness.

Another name that caught my eye was Eric Goranson, a lobbyist and parochial schools advocate whom Branstad named to the State Board of Education. He has been a leading critic of the Iowa Core Curriculum (see here and here). The Under the Golden Dome Blog argues that Goranson’s appointment may violate Iowa code, which states, “A voting member [of the Board of Education] shall not be engaged in professional education for a major portion of the member’s time nor shall the member derive a major portion of income from any business or activity connected with education.” Several of Goranson’s lobbying clients represent religious private schools or Christian home-schooling parents.

THIRD UPDATE: I forgot to mention Branstad’s two appointees to the State Judicial Nominating Commission: Helen St. Clair of Melrose and William Gustoff of Des Moines. I have been unable to find any information about Helen St. Clair, but a Maurice St. Clair of Melrose was among Branstad’s top 20 individual donors, contributing more than $45,000 to the gubernatorial campaign. I assume he is related to Helen St. Clair and will update this post if I confirm that. William Gustoff is a founding partner of the Whitaker Hagenow law firm, which includes Republican former U.S. attorney Matt Whitaker and State Representative Chris Hagenow. Branstad’s legal counsel Brenna Findley also worked at Whitaker Hagenow last year.

Proud to be an Iowan. Period. Thanks Zach.

On his first day back in office, Governor Terry Branstad rescinded Governor Tom Vilsack’s 2005 executive order on felon voting rights as well as Governor Chet Culver’s 2010 order on project labor agreements. By prohibiting project labor agreements on public works projects involving state funds (executive order 69), Branstad will drive down wages and help contractors that don’t hire unionized workers.

Branstad defended his voting rights directive (executive order 70) as a way to protect crime victims while recouping more fines and court costs. However, the main impact will be to shrink the Iowa electorate. Follow me after the jump for more background and analysis.  

Happy Martin Luther King, Jr. Day to the Bleeding Heartland community. Here are some links I enjoyed today.

Mother Jones put together a slide show on how we got this holiday, with photos of those who helped, and those who stood in the way.

Here are a couple dozen quotes from the civil rights leader.

Listen here as MLK explains, “Why I Am Opposed to the War in Vietnam.”

The AFSCME blog compiled some of MLK’s comments about labor.

Susannah Heschel describes the relationship between Dr. King and her father, Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel.

This is an open thread.

UPDATE: Hmmm.

The 22nd annual event hosted by the Iowa Department of Human Rights and the Iowa Commission on the Status of African Americans took place this morning at the Iowa Historical Building. Branstad was scheduled and listed in the program as signing a proclamation as well as delivering an address.

Branstad arrived around 10:40 a.m., signed the proclamation and made a few statements.  He was then overheard apologizing to some of the event organizers, saying he was too busy to give the address, noting that this is one of his first days in office. Branstad was sworn in Friday.

Branstad then took a few questions from the press before he and Lt. Gov. Kim Reynolds left.

Tim Albrecht, a spokesman for the governor, said Branstad was in meetings today that weren’t open to the public.

Wonder who he made time for on the holiday.

Back when George W. Bush was president, Republicans assailed any vote against any military funding bill as not supporting our troops on the battlefield. But the Republican caucus was united yesterday as the Senate voted 56-43 to block debate on this year’s Defense Authorization Act. The bill included a compromise likely to lead to lifting the ban on gays openly serving in the military. Even Republican Susan Collins of Maine, who says she’s for repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, stuck with her caucus over complaints about Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s restrictions on amendments during debate over the bill. One amendment Reid had planned to allow would have added the DREAM Act to the defense authorization bill. The DREAM Act “would allow undocumented students brought to America as children to earn a path to citizenship through completion of higher education or military service.”

Only two Democrats sided with Republicans to block debate on this bill: Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor of Arkansas. (Reid switched his vote to “no” at the last minute for procedural reasons, so he would be able to bring it up again later this year.) Lincoln’s excuse was the same as Collins’: she claimed to be for the DREAM Act and the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell compromise, but was angered by limits on amendments during the debate. Senate procedure is more important to these people than civil rights. At least Lincoln’s going to lose her re-election campaign anyway.

Although President Barack Obama has said he’s for repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, there’s no indication he or other White House officials lifted a finger to influence yesterday’s vote in the Senate. Nor did the president accuse those who blocked debate of undercutting soldiers at war, the way George Bush surely would have done in similar circumstances.

In Iowa, critics of Senator Chuck Grassley reacted quickly to his vote blocking debate on the defense bill. A statement from One Iowa accused him of compromising military readiness:

“Senator Grassley should stop playing politics with our national security,” said One Iowa Executive Director Carolyn Jenison. “Gay and lesbian servicemembers provide additional expertise and skills the military needs. Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell compromises the integrity of our armed sources and puts gay servicemembers at risk.”

Although Democratic Senate candidate Roxanne Conlin has long advocated civil equality for gays and lesbians, her campaign strangely sidestepped the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell angle in its statement yesterday:

“This is just one more inexcusable vote from Iowa’s senior Senator,” said Paulee Lipsman, spokesperson for the United States Senate campaign of Roxanne Conlin.  “His action denies a pay raise for the very men and women who are risking their lives for their country in the Middle East.  These families should not have to be on food stamps while a member of their family is off fighting in Afghanistan. Grassley’s vote denies better health care for those who are wounded.  It denies better equipment for those in combat.”

“Over the past two years, Senator Grassley has followed the advice of Senator Jim DeMint that Republicans block everything proposed by the Obama administration.  This partisanship is why Washington is broken.”

Key provisions of the bill include:

·         Authorize an across the board 1.4% pay raise for the military.

·         Improve the quality of life of the men and women of the all-volunteer force (active duty, National Guard and Reserves) and their families through fair pay, policies and benefits, including first rate health care, and address the needs of the wounded, ill, and injured service members and their families.

·         Provide our servicemen and women with the resources, training, technology, equipment (especially force protection) and authorities they need to succeed in combat and stability operations.

·         Enhance the capability of the Armed Forces to conduct counterinsurgency operations and apply the lessons of Iraq to Afghanistan, as appropriate.

I don’t think Grassley was proud of this vote. His Senate office put out several press releases yesterday, but nothing on the Defense Authorization Act.

Share any relevant thoughts in this thread.

UPDATE: During her September 22 meeting with the Sioux City Journal editorial board, Conlin called for Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell to be overturned:

Closeted gays ably serve in the military today, she said, but cited that 13,000 have left service at a time when the military needs positions filled by well-prepared Americans.

“We are granting waivers to convicted felons and we are throwing out people, experienced West Point graduates. It makes no sense,” Conlin said.

She continued: “It is not as though, right now, gay people are not serving. They are, they’re there, they’re fighting for us, they are dying for us. The only question is – can they do it without living a lie? The answer to that, in the United States of America, has to be ‘yes.’ “

In two cases that could affect married same-sex couples in Iowa, federal Judge Joseph Tauro ruled Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional today, Lisa Keen reported for Bay Windows. Regarding Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Health and Human Services,

Maura T. Healey, chief of the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Civil Rights Division, told Judge Tauro that Section 3 of DOMA — the section that limits the definition of marriage for federal benefits to straight couples — violates the state’s right under the federal constitution to sovereign authority to define and regulate the marital status of its residents. Healey called DOMA an “animus-based national marriage law” that intrudes on core state authority and “forces the state to discriminate against its own citizens.”

Christopher Hall, representing HHS, said Congress should be able to control the meaning of terms, such as “marriage,” used in its own statutes, and should be able to control how federal money is allocated for federal benefits provided to persons based on their marital status. Tauro essentially replied that the government’s power is not unlimited.

The other case was Gill v. Office of Personnel Management, brought by Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD):

GLAD attorney Mary Bonauto told Tauro that DOMA constitutes a “classic equal protection” violation, by taking one class of married people in Massachusetts and dividing it into two. One class, she noted, gets federal benefits, the other does not. Just as the federal government cannot take the word “person” and say it means only Caucasians or only women, said Bonauto, it should not be able to take the word “marriage” and say it means only heterosexual couples. Bonauto said the government has no reason to withhold the more than 1,000 federal benefits of marriage from same-sex couples, and noted that a House Judiciary Committee report “explicitly stated the purpose of DOMA was to express moral disapproval of homosexuality.”

Keen notes that the plaintiffs in both cases asked the judge to apply a strict scrutiny standard, which “requires the government to come up with a fairly significant reason for treating gay couples differently under the law.” Judge Tauro found that Section 3 of DOMA fails even a “rational basis” standard, which is easier for the government to satisfy.

If today’s rulings are upheld by the First Circuit U.S. Appeals court or the U.S. Supreme Court, hundreds of Iowa couples married since April 2009 may be able to receive federal benefits.

UPDATE: Andrew Cohen, CBS News Radio Chief Legal Analyst and Legal Editor, is going through the rulings. He notes Judge Tauro held that Congress has no interest in uniform definition of marriage rights and that the federal government should have left marriage policy to the states. In addition, the judge determined that “facts upon which DOMA was based [are] now obsolete or at least overshadowed by more recent science on same-sex marriage-childrearing.”

SECOND UPDATE: Speaking of marriage equality, NBC has opened up a wedding contest to same-sex couples. Initially only heterosexual couples were eligible to enter.

THIRD UPDATE: The Constitutional Law Prof blog summarized Judge Tauro’s legal reasoning and posted links to pdf files of both rulings.

FOURTH UPDATE: Adam Bink discusses the debate in LGBT circles on whether it would be better or worse for the U.S. Department of Justice to appeal this ruling.

The Senate Armed Services Committee voted 16-12 today to pass a compromise that will probably lead to repeal of the prohibition on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military. Susan Collins of Maine was the only Republican to vote for the compromise. Jim Webb of Virginia was the only Democrat to vote against it. I wouldn’t have predicted that Webb would vote no when people like Evan Bayh, Robert Byrd and Ben Nelson voted yes.

This bill appears to have the votes to pass on the Senate floor. Representative Patrick Murphy (an Iraq War veteran) is offering a comparable amendment to the Defense Authorization bill in the House. Technically, it’s not correct to call this a “repeal” of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, because the legislation allows officials at the White House, Pentagon and Joint Chiefs to leave the policy in place. Here’s what will happen if the amendment makes it into the final bill passed by the House and Senate:

When the President signs the Department of Defense Authorization bill into law, DADT will not instantly be repealed. Repeal would take place only after the study group completes its work in December 2010 and after the President, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Secretary of Defense all certify that repeal will not hurt military readiness or unit cohesion.

So, gay and lesbian soldiers will continue to be discharged several months (and perhaps several years) from now. Still, I agree with Adam Bink; this has to be viewed as a “giant step” toward taking Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell off the books. Ideally, Congress would have passed stronger legislation, but I’d rather have them pass this deal now than shoot for something better next year. If Republicans took control of the House or Senate, we’d have no hope of repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell for a long time.

Iowa’s senators don’t have seats on the Armed Services Committee, but Tom Harkin is expected to support repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Chuck Grassley opposes moving forward on this issue until the Pentagon has completed its review of the policy, and it sounds like even if the report recommends repeal, Grassley is a likely no vote: “I’m going to be listening to see what it does for readiness and our national security. Because we’ve had the policy in place for 18 years… and it seems to have worked and not affected the readiness.”

Senator, that policy didn’t work so well for “over 13,500 well trained, able-bodied soldiers willing to take a bullet for their country” who have been “kicked out of the military simply because they were gay.”

Share any relevant thoughts in this thread.

UPDATE: The House passed the amendment 234 to 194 tonight, with five Republicans voting yes and 26 Democrats voting no. I will post a link to the roll call when it’s available, but I think all three Iowa Democrats voted yes. Leonard Boswell’s statement on why he supports repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is after the jump.

UPDATE: Here is the House roll call. Bruce Braley and Dave Loebsack did vote yes, along with most of the Democratic caucus. Tom Latham and Steve King voted no, with almost all the House Republicans.

The day after Rand Paul won the Republican primary for U.S. Senate in Kentucky, his views on civil rights legislation sparked a media feeding frenzy so intense that Paul became only the third guest in recent history to cancel a scheduled appearance on “Meet the Press.”

Several prominent Republicans, including Iowa’s Senator Chuck Grassley, have distanced themselves from Paul’s ideas about whether the government should be able to bar discrimination by private businesses. Paul walked back his comments on civil rights too.

I contacted the campaign of Iowa’s Libertarian candidate for governor, Eric Cooper, to get his take on Paul’s remarks and government regulation of businesses in general. Cooper’s responses are after the jump.

Vice President Joe Biden headlines Governor Chet Culver’s re-election rally today in Cedar Rapids. If you are watching in person or online, please share your impressions in this thread. I will update the post later with more coverage of the event. Adam Sullivan is live-tweeting for Iowa Independent.

Yesterday the governor kicked off his campaign at Hoover High School in Des Moines, followed by stops in Ames, Marshalltown and Waterloo. Kathie Obradovich felt Culver’s speech “salvaged” the otherwise low-energy event in Des Moines. After the jump I’ve posted excerpts from Culver’s remarks, which his campaign released. He frames the race as a choice of going backwards “to policies that created this recession” or forward to continue the investments his administration has begun. Culver outlined some goals for the next five years, such as completing rebuilding efforts from the 2008 floods, “making quality pre-school available to every Iowa child whose parents want to take advantage of it,” pursuing stem cell research in Iowa, and “increasing the percentage of our energy production coming from alternative sources from 20% to at least 30%.” Culver chided Republicans who “just say no,” think corporate tax cuts are the answer for every problem and “continue to preach the failed doctrine of trickle down economics.”

In addition to the excerpts you’ll find below, the governor spoke up for protecting a woman’s right to make her own health-care decisions and against writing discrimination into the Iowa constitution. Later in Marshalltown, Culver noted that discrimination is “not the Iowa way […] We’ve always been at the front when it’s come to civil rights.”

Any comments about the governor’s race are welcome in this thread. Speaking of Republicans who want to take us backwards, Terry Branstad’s campaign started running a new ad today, which portrays the former governor as “the change we need now.” I’ll have more to say about Branstad’s campaign message in a different post, but for now I wonder whether he will get away with repeating his lie about Iowa running a “billion-dollar deficit.”

UPDATE: Um, what the heck? Someone get the governor a driver who won’t try to chase another driver down for a stupid reason.

John Deeth liveblogged the Biden event here. Kathie Obradovich tweeted here. Key points of Biden’s message: he’s known Chet Culver since he was seven years old and knows he has “the gumption to handle the job at this time.” Also, with Culver in charge “Iowa is better off than almost every other state in the nation … Iowa is still moving forward.” Biden praised Culver for being ahead of the curve in establishing the Power Fund in 2007:

“Government is not the answer but it can prime the pump and encourage the private sector.”

“45 out of [50] governors, Democrat and Republican, are sitting on their hands. Because of Chet’s leadership Iowa is better prepared.” […]

“What are Republicans FOR? Not a joke. Tell me one affirmative thing the Republican Party is for.”

Good question, Mr. Vice President. Biden also noted that the stimulus bill brought $3.3 billion to Iowa, and said Culver had used $4 billion in federal and state flood recovery money well. Biden said Iowa is on the upswing and has an unemployment rate well below the national average, which is “no accident, it’s because of Governor Chet Culver.”

SECOND UPDATE: Todd Dorman found Biden’s praise for Culver a bit over-the-top. Tom Beaumont’s story for the Des Moines Register is here. Kay Henderson’s liveblog for Radio Iowa is here. She’s captured more quotes from the vice president.

Iowa Republican State Senator Merlin Bartz is raising the bar for pettiness among self-styled defenders of “traditional marriage.”

His latest target: a new rule proposed by the Iowa Department of Natural Resources, which would broaden the definition of “immediate family” for those using state-run campsites to include guardians and domestic partners.  

President Barack Obama has instructed the Health and Human Services department to develop new rules for hospitals that receive Medicare or Medicaid funding.

The memorandum from Obama to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, made public late Thursday night, orders new rules that would ensure hospitals “respect the rights of patients to designate visitors.”

Obama says the new rules should require that hospitals not deny visitation privileges on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.

“Every day, all across America, patients are denied the kindnesses and caring of a loved one at their sides whether in a sudden medical emergency or a prolonged hospital stay,” Obama says in the memo.

Affected, he said, are “gay and lesbian American who are often barred from the bedsides of the partners with whom they may have spent decades of their lives — unable to be there for the person they love, and unable to act as a legal surrogate if their partner is incapacitated.”

Cue conservatives to start whining about “special rights for homosexuals,” as if there is something extraordinary about visiting a loved one in the hospital or granting your life partner power of medical attorney. I’m glad the president took a stand on this issue.

I’m curious to see how the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops reacts to this executive order. I don’t know whether Catholic hospitals are more likely to have rules in place preventing visitation by gay or lesbian partners, but I would expect religious conservatives to complain about the government nullifying such rules. I wonder whether there is even grounds to challenge Obama’s order in court, if hospitals could demonstrate that their visitation bans are grounded in religious principles.  

During his State of the Union speech last week, President Barack Obama promised, “This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are.” Today the Senate Armed Services Committee held a hearing today on the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy. Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, made headlines by saying he believes “the right thing to do” is to let gays serve openly:

Adm. Mike Mullen’s statement was the strongest yet from the uniformed military on this volatile issue, although he stressed that he was “speaking for myself and myself only.”

He told the Senate Armed Services Committee Tuesday he is deeply troubled by a policy that forces people to “lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens.”

Defense Secretary Robert Gates told the Senate committee he also supports ending Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. However, he is appointing a panel to study how to lift the ban for a full year, meaning that hundreds more men and women are likely to be discharged under the policy before it goes away. The Obama administration is expected to implement new rules on purging troops under this policy, but it’s not yet clear how much that will reduce the number of discharges while Gates’ panel studies the issue. According to MSNBC, “more than 10,900 troops have been fired under the policy” since 1993, but “The 2009 figure – 428 – was dramatically lower than the 2008 total of 619.”

Meanwhile, at today’s hearing Senator John McCain argued against reviewing the policy at this time, saying it boosts “cohesion” and “unit morale.” He also presented a letter signed by 1000 officers who support Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.

Come on, McCain. Even a jerk like Joe Lieberman understands why this policy is stupid.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin made the case for ending Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell in this piece for the Politico, but it doesn’t sound like he’s in a big hurry:

So there is little reason to continue this policy. But as we proceed, it is vital that we are sensitive to any complications of this policy shift. Change is always hard, especially when it involves social issues or personal beliefs. Lack of care as we proceed might spark opposition from those who could be open to change, and inflame the opposition of those already against it. And I would encourage those who favor change not to mistake deliberation for undue delay.

Point taken, but I am concerned by the timetable Gates is setting with a yearlong study. I hope Congress will act this year, because if Republicans retake the House or the Senate this November, there will be no chance of ditching Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell for the forseeable future.

Daily Kos user TennesseeGurl notes that even if Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is repealed, LGBT Veterans will still get a raw deal. Unfortunately, I see no realistic path to fixing that problem.

UPDATE: Levin “said an amendment could be added to the must-pass Defense Authorization bill which outlines military policy for the year.” Taking that path would allow the Senate to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell with a simple majority (as opposed to the 60 votes required to break a Republican filibuster).

President Barack Obama gave a great speech yesterday at the Vermont Avenue Baptist Church on Dr. Martin Luther King Jr’s legacy:

Marc Hansen’s latest column for the Des Moines Register profiles Robert A. Wright, who died last week. Wright

fought in World War II as a first lieutenant, helped integrate the dorms at the University of Iowa, played football for the Hawkeyes, worked as a Des Moines cop, graduated from Drake Law School, become head of the NAACP Iowa-Nebraska Conference and earned the nickname “Mr. Civil Rights.”

So much accomplished, but so much still to be done. Democratic Senate candidate Bob Krause is right to call attention to the shameful disparity in Iowa’s incarceration rates, although solving that problem seems more like a task for state officials than for a U.S. senator. UPDATE: Krause contacted me to point out that “that there is a federal issue in incarcerations. Our neighbors in Minnesota have the same problem at a rate approximate with ours. Disproportionate incarceration falls under the ‘equal protection’ clause of the Constitution.” Point taken.

Speaking of civil rights, it looks like the Obama administration may not push for repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell this year after all. Given likely Republican gains in Congress in 2010, I think prospects for repeal will be dead for a long time if it doesn’t happen soon.

Any comments about today’s holiday or any issues relating to equality are welcome in this thread.

State Senator Brad Zaun of Urbandale has filed paperwork with the Federal Election Commission to run for Congress in Iowa’s third district next year, The Iowa Republican reported today. Zaun has also revamped his campaign website. Before he can face seven-term incumbent Leonard Boswell, Zaun must win a Republican primary, where his main opponent is likely to be former Iowa State University wrestling coach Jim Gibbons.

Judging from various comment threads at The Iowa Republican, supporters of Gibbons feel Zaun is too “moderate.” There have been a couple of references to “pro-gay” votes by Zaun, but I have no idea what they are talking about. Zaun voted against the 2007 bill that amended the Iowa Civil Rights Act to prohibit discrimination because of sexual orientation (click here for the bill history). Zaun is also on record opposing same-sex marriage rights.

I would expect both Zaun and Gibbons to be able to raise substantial campaign funding. The eventual nominee will need it, because the National Republican Congressional Committee has a lot less cash on hand than its Democratic counterpart and has many more enticing targets than IA-03.

UPDATE: From Radio Iowa:

Boswell was not among the congressional Democrats targeted, nationally, by the G-O-P in 2008, but Zaun says he’s been assured the National Republican Congressional Committee will invest money to defeat Boswell in 2010.

“They’ve told me that this is going to be a priority and this seat is going to be one of the top targeted seats,” Zaun says.

They’ll have to step up their fundraising to keep that promise.

by Rinku Sen & Billy Parish

Last week, the Labor Department reported that youth unemployment stands at 18.2%, nearly twice the national average of 9.8%. The percentage of young people without a job is a staggering 53.4 percent, the highest figure since World War II. Looking deeper, the statistics for youth of color are terrible and telling.

According to the most recent data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 40.7% of black youth between 16-19 are unemployed, almost double the amount of whites teenagers (23%). For Latinos the same age, the rate is nearly 30%. Get a little older and the gap grows wider. Unemployment for black Americans aged 20-24 is 27.1%, over twice that faced by white youth (13.1%) in the same age range.

The glaring differences indicate that unemployment is not only decidedly raced, but also that the current economic condition is wholly unforgiving for young people of color. Only a massive, well-funded set of green jobs programs explicitly designed to close those racial gaps can create a truly vital, full-employment economy.

I’m passing along this job listing I received via e-mail. If you know of a job opportunity with a progressive non-profit organization, feel free to pass it along (desmoinesdem AT yahoo.com).

Speaking of marriage equality, a study by Freedom to Marry showed that 100 percent of state legislators in California, New York, Connecticut and Massachusetts who voted to legalize same-sex marriage were re-elected. That figure includes some Republicans who were targeted by religious conservatives after they voted for marriage equality.

Position: Regional Organizer

Reports to: Campaign Director

Location: Des Moines, Iowa

One Iowa and the One Iowa Education Fund are dedicated to supporting full equality for LGBT individuals living in Iowa through grassroots efforts and education.

Position Responsibilities:

One Iowa/EF seeks a grassroots organizer to oversee regional educational, outreach, and organizing activities in advocating for full equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) Iowans. One Iowa is currently focused on a comprehensive campaign to improve the public climate and shift thinking about marriage equality in Iowa.  The Regional Organizer will be responsible for educational, outreach, and organizing activities in his or her specific region.

The Regional Organizer will:

·     Develop and manage teams in local communities in assigned region in order to identify and organize our base through outreach and field efforts

·     Train individuals to host house parties in assigned region

·     Identify, schedule, and lead house parties in assigned region

·     Conduct voter registration and canvass efforts in assigned region

·     Implement a strategy to collect pledges and contact information from individuals in support of marriage equality

·     Use various methods to collect personal stories from individuals, couples, and families in assigned region, including outreach and planning events

·     Develop and run phone canvasses, including volunteer recruitment and training

·     Identify, conduct outreach, and manage relationships with supportive faith leaders in assigned region

·     Plan and implement trainings and events for faith leaders, families, and other supportive individuals in assigned region

·     Conduct outreach to supportive constituent groups as assigned

·     Work with other grassroots organizer(s), education department staff, and Campaign Director to plan and implement education and outreach activities

·     Recruit and manage volunteers in assigned region

·     Additional educational or outreach responsibilities as assigned

Position Qualifications:

·     Experience in non-profits or campaigns preferred.

·     Experience working in Iowa is a significant advantage.

·     Proficiency in database management, Microsoft Office (Word, Excel, Access, PowerPoint, and Outlook) required.

·     Excellent writing, research, editing and oral communication skills and must be able to prioritize and perform multiple tasks simultaneously.

·     Strong organizational skills, attention to detail and commitment to high quality and timely work product required.

·     Experience in public speaking and the ability to represent the organization publicly.

·     Ability to travel in-state 8 – 10 days/month.

Salary range is high 20s.  Ten vacation days and comprehensive health care are provided. To apply for this position please send a resume and cover letter to brad@oneiowa.org. Applications accepted until position is filled.  No calls please.

The Democrats representing Iowa in the U.S. House of Representatives did us proud today.

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (background here) passed by a mostly party-line 247-171 vote (roll call here).

Also, the Paycheck Fairness Act passed 256-163 (roll call here).

As expected, Bruce Braley, Dave Loebsack and Leonard Boswell voted yes on both measures. Republicans Tom Latham and Steve King voted no on both.

So, King and Latham don’t care if women get paid less than men for doing the same job.

Also, they don’t see anything wrong with a 2007 Supreme Court ruling that said women have less than a year from the employer’s initial discriminatory act to file a lawsuit seeking redress. Never mind that it may be years before a female employee finds out that her boss is systematically paying her less than male colleagues doing the same job at the same performance level.

Now both bills head to the Senate, where Democrats should be able to break Republican filibusters, especially if Al Franken and/or Roland Burris have been seated by the time the votes take place.

By now you have surely read about Bernard Madoff and his $50 billion Ponzi scheme. For background, here’s a collection of New York Times articles on the scandal.

The Securities Exchange Commission is conducting an internal investigation to find out why Madoff’s criminal enterprise went undetected for so long. It’s already obvious that this was a massive regulatory failure.

The SEC was warned about Madoff:

The SEC had the authority to investigate Madoff’s investment business, which managed billions of dollars for wealthy investors and philanthropies. Financial analysts raised concerns about Madoff’s practices repeatedly over the past decade, including a 1999 letter to the SEC that accused Madoff of running a Ponzi scheme. But the agency did not conduct even a routine examination of the investment business until last week.

No one knows yet how many people were involved in helping Madoff conceal his fraud. And while Madoff’s operation was particularly massive, no one knows how many other fraudulent investment firms are out there, because the SEC lacks the resources to enforce compliance with financial securities laws.

Those who had invested with Madoff have lost the entire value of their accounts, and they are not the only victims of his crimes. In fact, Madoff may have indirectly harmed more victims than any other white-collar criminal in history. His clients included many non-profit organizations and charitable foundations, some of which have already ceased operations. Numerous Jewish non-profits have been hit hard, but the fallout will extend far beyond the Jewish community. The Picower Foundation alone gave out tens of millions of dollars in grants every year. Within months, the education, human rights and arts non-profits that relied on those funds are likely to be in financial crisis.

The JEHT Foundation was much smaller than the Picower Foundation but “was a leading supporter of civil rights causes, including groups working to expand voting rights in the South.” Its outgoing president noted when announcing plans to shut down operations that

The issues the Foundation addressed received very limited philanthropic support and the loss of the foundation’s funding and leadership will cause significant pain and disruption of the work for many dedicated people and organizations. The Foundation’s programs have met with significant success in recent years – promoting change in these critical areas in partnership with government and the non-profit sector. Hopefully others will look closely at this work and consider supporting it going forward.

We can hope that others will step in to support the worthy causes whose funders were defrauded by Madoff, but that is extremely unlikely. Just about every grant-making foundation has suffered a significant decline in assets this year because of the stock market’s slide. Individuals of great wealth have also seen their net worth shrink. Non-profit organizations were already bracing for a difficult fundraising year in 2009. The Madoff scandal makes it even more likely that many non-profits will not survive this downturn.

Consider them casualties of “small government” at the SEC, and remember what happened to them the next time conservatives whine about big, bad regulators.  

Over Thanksgiving my family (all Barack Obama voters in the general) were talking about what we’d like to see him do as president. One of my biggest concerns about Obama has always been that he would compromise too much in the name of bipartisanship and not seize the opportunity to get groundbreaking legislation through Congress. I’ve also worried that he would water down good policies that threaten to significantly bring down his approval rating.

From my perspective, Bill Clinton’s presidency was not very successful for a lot of reasons. Some of them were his fault: he put the wrong people in charge of certain jobs, and he picked the wrong battles and listened too much to Wall Street advisers when it came to policy.

Some things were not Clinton’s fault: the Democrats who ran Congress in 1993 and 1994 were not always interested in working with him, and the leaders of the Republican-controlled Congress were more interested in destroying his presidency than anything else.

After getting burned in the 1994 elections, Clinton hired Dick Morris as a political adviser and moved to the right in order to get re-elected. He served a full two terms, but he didn’t leave a mark on this country. His greatest achievement, balancing the budget, was undone quickly by his successor. Many smaller successes on environmental and social policies were also reversed by George Bush’s administration.

Clinton approved a bunch of good presidential directives, especially on the environment, during his last 60 days in office. Doing them years earlier would not only have been good policy, it also would have prevented Ralph Nader from gaining so much traction in 2000.

Clinton left some very big problems unaddressed, like global warming and our reliance on foreign oil, because the obvious solutions to these problems would have been unpopular.

Compare Clinton’s legacy to that of Lyndon Johnson. Although Johnson made terrible mistakes in Vietnam (continuing and compounding mistakes made by John F. Kennedy), he enacted a domestic agenda that changed this country forever. Some of Johnson’s achievements were popular (Medicare), while others cost the Democrats politically in many states (the Civil Rights Act). But Johnson did not shy away from big change on civil rights because of the political cost.

I understand that no president will ever do everything I’d like to see done. I’d be satisfied if Obama enacted a groundbreaking, lasting improvement in one or two big areas, like health care or global warming. The right policies often have powerful enemies. I would rather see Obama get good laws passed to address a couple of big problems, even if doing so costs him the 2012 election.

My fear is that in Obama will end up like Bill Clinton–a two-term president who didn’t achieve anything that will continue to affect Americans’ lives four or five decades down the road.

If Obama only goes to the mat to accomplish one or two big things, what should they be? Keeping his promise to end the war in Iraq? Getting universal health care through Congress? Taking real steps to address climate change? Enacting a huge public-works program to deal with unemployment? Building high-speed rail connecting major American cities?

Would you be satisfied with progress in one or two areas, even if it meant that Obama was not re-elected in 2012?

After the jump I’ve posted a “meme” on being bold in your personal life, which is going around some of the “mommy blogs.” Some of the questions have more to do with luck or having money than with taking risks or being bold, though.

“They’re Coming to Your Town,” a new DVD produced by the American Family Association, looks and sounds like a spoof created by The Onion. Click the link to watch the trailer and read the transcript. Here’s an excerpt:

It could happen to your town.

Man: They’ve come out of the closet.

AFA presents a look at how a handful of homosexual activists infiltrated the Eureka Springs, Arkansas government and changed the very moral fiber of the city. […]

Learn the strategies used by gay activists and don’t let this happen to your city. This DVD is a must-teaching tool – watch, and learn how to fight a well-organized gay agenda to take over the cities of America, one city at a time.

Man 3: If it hasn’t happened in your town, get ready, because it is going to happen.

Oh no! Gays are coming to my town to take over the government! Mr. desmoinesdem said this trailer reminded him of the anti-Communist films they made during the 1950s.

Speaking of satire, here’s a piece from the latest Onion: I’m Not One of Those ‘Love Thy Neighbor’ Christians. Excerpt:

My faith in the Lord is about the pure, simple values: raising children right, saying grace at the table, strictly forbidding those who are Methodists or Presbyterians from receiving communion because their beliefs are heresies, and curing homosexuals. That’s all. Just the core beliefs. You won’t see me going on some frothy-mouthed tirade about being a comfort to the downtrodden. […]

We’re not all “Jesus Freaks” who run around screaming about how everyone should “Judge not lest ye be judged,” whine “Blessed are the meek” all the time, or drone on and on about how we’re all equal in the eyes of God! Some of us are just trying to be good, honest folks who believe the unbaptized will roam the Earth for ages without the comfort of God’s love when Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior returns on Judgment Day to whisk the righteous off to heaven.

Now, granted, there are some Christians on the lunatic fringe who take their beliefs a little too far. Take my coworker Karen, for example. She’s way off the deep end when it comes to religion: going down to the homeless shelter to volunteer once a month, donating money to the poor, visiting elderly shut-ins with the Meals on Wheels program-you name it!

But believe me, we’re not all that way. The people in my church, for the most part, are perfectly ordinary Americans like you and me. They believe in the simple old-fashioned traditions-Christmas, Easter, the slow and deliberate takeover of more and more county school boards to get the political power necessary to ban evolution from textbooks statewide. That sort of thing.

Last night two women who belong to the house of worship I attend made a lifetime commitment to each other in front of about 200 friends, relatives and fellow congregants.

It was a moving ceremony, followed by a joyous reception.

Their loving bond is no threat to anyone’s marriage.

In lieu of gifts, they asked well-wishers to make a donation to any of several charitable causes. They also set up a “wedding registry” at Equality California for the “No on Prop. 8” campaign. Proposition 8 seeks to ban gay marriage in California.

If marriage equality is important to you, consider donating to Equality California. I also encourage you to get involved with One Iowa, the state’s largest LGBT advocacy group.

I had a doctor’s appointment this morning, and they had the CBS Early Show on in the waiting room. One of the anchors was down in Oxford, Mississippi on the Ole Miss campus, where the first presidential debate is scheduled to be held tonight.

Behind him a crowd of mostly white students cheered and waved “Change We Need” signs.

That’s right, a bunch of white kids cheered for a black presidential nominee on the Ole Miss campus, where a building still has bullet marks from the violence that accompanied black student James Meredith’s enrollment in 1962.

It’s a great day for this country, even if John McCain decides not to show up to debate Barack Obama.

Granny Doc has more on this from the perspective of someone who remembers the civil rights unrest.

As always, post a comment or send me an e-mail if I’ve left out a noteworthy event.

If you have kids and live in central Iowa, this coming week is your last chance to see the Asian elephant Rosie and her calf JP at the Blank Park Zoo in Des Moines. July 13 will be their last day at the zoo.

Monday, July 7:

It’s Edna Griffin day at the Fort Des Moines Museum and Education Center, 75 S.E. Army Post Road in Des Moines. Sixty years ago, Griffin “led a series of protests that ultimately enforced Iowa’s civil rights statutes after she was refused service at a Katz Drug Store in downtown Des Moines because she was black.”

The Des Moines Register reports:

The tribute to Edna Griffin, who served in the Women’s Army Corps in World War II, includes a 2 p.m. ceremony for naming a room at the Grimes State Office Building, 400 E. 14th St., and a 7 p.m. theatrical tribute at the Fort Des Moines Museum and Education Center, 75 S.E. Army Post Road.

The tribute will be done by Ruth Ann Gaines and Maureen Korte, with music by John Cheatem, and a march to remember Iowa’s civil rights heroes. Both events are free. For more information, call 282-8060. […]

To recreate the mood of the era, the tribute uses monologues derived from interviews with people involved with Griffin’s protests of the store and subsequent lawsuit.

Representative Bruce Braley (IA-01) begins his annual “Congress on Your Corner” tour on Monday.  “Congress on Your Corner” meetings are designed to give Iowans an opportunity to meet with Braley to discuss their concerns, discuss recent initiatives in Congress, and open casework.

Here is Braley’s public schedule for the day:  

8:00 am                    Waterloo/Cedar Falls Congress on Your Corner

                                   Cedar Falls Conference Center

                                    3712 Cedar Heights Dr .

                                    Cedar Falls , Iowa      

11:00am                    Parkersburg Congress on Your Corner

                                   Parkersburg Veterans Memorial Building

                                    205 Colfax St .

                                    Parkersburg , Iowa

2:00pm                    Waverly Congress on Your Corner

                                   Waverly Public Library

                                   1500  W. Bremer Ave.

                                   Waverly, Iowa

The Environmental Protection Commission will hold a general discussion meeting from 1:30 to 3:00 p.m. July 7 at King’s Pointe Resort, 1520 Lakeshore Drive in Storm Lake. This meeting will be followed by a walking tour of Storm Lake, starting at the resort at 3:00 p.m. At 6:00 p.m., the committee will attend the Storm Lake Preservation Association Picnic at the Storm Lake Municipal Golf Course Club House at 1528 Lakeshore Drive.  

Tuesday, July 8:

Lots going on at the Environmental Protection Commission’s monthly meeting:

The Department of Natural Resources will update the Environmental Protection Commission on the status of flooding events in Iowa and summarize its response efforts to the flood at the monthly EPC meeting July 8. They will also discuss how land use practices can contribute to flooding.

The meeting will start at 9:00 a.m. at King’s Pointe Resort, 1520 Lakeshore Drive in Storm Lake. The meeting is open to the public, with public comments starting at 10:30 a.m.

During the meeting, the EPC will also consider a proposed rule to establish criteria for awarding grants to independent recycling redemption centers. The DNR received $1 million in grants from the state’s general fund to improve these centers.

The EPC will also hear a proposal to update the Water Quality Standards Antidegradation Policy, which sets minimum requirements for the state to follow in order to conserve, maintain and protect existing uses and water quality.

DNR geologist Claire Hruby will discuss manure application on frozen or snow-covered ground at 1 p.m. on Tuesday. This issue was raised in May with an EPC motion. The EPC also received a petition from the Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement to limit or ban this practice. ICCI has amended its petition and granted an indefinite extension on the usual 60-day period for response to the petition.

Look for more information about the agenda items on the DNR Web site under Commissions and Boards at www.iowadnr.gov.

Join Senators Staci Appel, Amanda Ragan, and Becky Schmitz for a fundraising reception to benefit the Senate Majority Fund:

Women of the Senate”

Past, Present & Future

Tuesday, July 8th from 5:30-7:30 PM

at the home of Roxanne Conlin

2900 Southern Hills Circle, Des Moines 50312

Join us for an evening of good food and drink and to support the Senate Democratic Majority Fund.  Valet Parking will be provided.

Suggested Contribution Levels:

Host: $1000      Sponsor: $500

Patron: $250      Supporter: $125

Guest: $50

Click here to contribute.

*all online contributions before July 6th will be recognized at the event

Please RSVP if you can attend. (The link to RSVP was broken–I would call the Senate Democrats office.)

Bruce Braley will hold a telephone town hall meeting on July 8 at 7 pm Central Daylight Time:

The purpose of the call is to allow Rep. Braley and his staff to discuss federal assistance available to flood victims and answer questions about federal disaster programs.

The technology employed by Braley will call out to thousands of Iowans in the First District who can then choose to participate in the forum when reached.

Iowans who wish to call in to the town hall themselves should contact one of Rep. Braley’s district offices for a call-in number and passcode.

Nearly 5,000 residents of the district participated in Braley’s first telephone town hall meeting last month, which was about gasoline prices.

One Iowa’s “Coffee House/Happy Hour” will be at the Ritual Cafe, 13th Street between Grand and Locust in downtown Des Moines, from 5:00 to 6:45 pm on July 8:

At One Iowa, we believe all families should have equal protections and responsibilities; the way to achieve this is through marriage.  As we continue our work toward Marriage Equality, this month we are focusing on the newly released comic (hot off the presses) “Iowa’s Noble Courage In Civil Rights” and the recently shot video “United for Equality.”

On Tuesday, One Iowa has the honor to host Andrea Fehring, our Marriage Equality Educator at Ritual; she will talk about the comic and video, and discuss how you can become more involved in this campaign toward equality.  Andrea’s presentation will start at 5:30pm. […]  

For questions, please contact One Iowa at (515)288-4019, or you can visit our web site at www.oneiowa.org.

Thursday, July 10:

A huge list of prominent Iowa Democrats including former Lt. Governor Sally Pederson & Jim Autry and Charlotte & Fed Hubbell are hosting a fundraiser for Becky Greenwald on July 10 from 5:00 to 6:30 pm at Dos Rios restaurant on 4th Street and Court Avenue in downtown Des Moines:

Contribution levels:

$1,000 – Host             $500 – Sponsor           $250 – Supporter        $100 – Friend

Please make checks payable to: Becky Greenwald for Congress

RSVP (515) 987-2800 or BeckyGreenwald@gmail.com

Individual contributions limited to $2300 and are not tax deductible.  Corporate contributions are not permitted.

Becky Greenwald for Congress * Iowa 4th District

P.O. Box 608 * Perry, IA  50220 * 515-564-3883 * www.beckygreenwald.com

Friday, July 11:

IowaPolitics.com is holding another “Cookies and Conversation” program at Drake University from 1:30 to 2:30 pm:

The program, “Food, Fuel, and Iowa ‘s Future Energy Needs” will feature panelists:

Bill Northey, Iowa’s Secretary of Agriculture; Frank Cownie, Des Moines Mayor; John Norris, Chairman of the Iowa Utilities Board; and Roya Stanley, Executive Director of the Iowa Office of Energy Independence.

The event is free, but reservations are required. Free cookies and beverages will be served.

Doors will open at 1 p.m. The program will be held in Levitt Hall, in Old Main, at 25th and University.

If you can attend please RSVP to Julie Rutz at rutz@IowaPolitics.com or call 515.226.8774. If you cannot attend but are interested in the program Mediacom will be taping the program and rebroadcasting it on its Connections Channel and Video On Demand program. The schedule will be posted on our Website at http://www.iowapolitics.com/ as soon as it becomes available.

Sunday, July 13:

House district 59 candidate Jerry Sullivan is holding a fundraiser at the Great Midwestern Café, 1250 NW 128th St in Clive, from 5 pm to 7 pm:

Partner: $500

Host: $250

Sponsor: $100

Friend: $50

Checks can be made out to Sullivan for State Representative.

Please RSVP with Mike at (614) 561-9117 or mmccall@iowademocrats.org.

The rest of the press release from Sullivan’s campaign is after the jump. It includes a link to his ActBlue page.

A while back I stopped reading the “Edwards should endorse Obama” diaries at Daily Kos, because I was tired of getting drawn into arguments with Hillary-haters in the comment threads. Moreover, I really don’t care whether John Edwards endorses a candidate–it wouldn’t change my feelings about either of the contenders.

When Elizabeth Edwards recently confirmed that she prefers Hillary’s health-care plan and will appear alongside Clinton when she campaigns in North Carolina, some of the Obama fans at Daily Kos went ballistic. Again, I avoided those diaries, because I am tired of trying to explain to people that yes, many health-care experts agree that some form of individual mandates are needed in order to provide truly universal health care.

Today longtime Edwards supporter Benny put up a rant at the EENRblog about somebody’s open letter pleading with Elizabeth Edwards to endorse Obama. I wasn’t planning to read the diary Benny was complaining about, but edgery highlighted an amazing assertion that prompted me to click over.

This statement in Bcgntn’s diary is what grabbed my attention:

Senator Clinton may believe without Lyndon Johnson the Civil Rights Act 1964 would not have come into being.  I recall those years.  People were out on the streets in protest.  The community concluded it was time for a change.  The President merely signed the papers.  

I’ve written before about how annoyed I was in January when the Obama campaign took Hillary’s comments about LBJ and twisted them into some allegedly racist remark denigrating Martin Luther King Jr.

But that’s not my main point today. What that Obama supporter wrote reflects a fantasy shared by too many Obama supporters, in my opinion: namely, that if he is elected, Obama is going to do what his people-powered movement demands.

One of my biggest concerns about Obama has always been that he seems likely to make far too many concessions to the Republican agenda or to DC pundits’ conventional wisdom. He has chosen not to lead on some of the key battles in the U.S. Senate. He talks a lot about finding consensus and bringing people together. His strategy for winning the open-primary states has been to maximize his support among Republicans and independents who cross over.

When you look at his very cautious voting record and avoidance of leading on any controversial issue, it seems highly unlikely to me that he will govern like a progressive. There will be many days when Obama has to choose between doing what Tim Russert and David Broder would like, and doing what the Obama fans at Daily Kos would like, and I think the Kossacks will be the disappointed ones on those days.

I’ve raised this point with several thoughtful Obama supporters, such as Populista, the 14-year-old who will probably be a great progressive leader someday. The consensus seems to be that if he gets elected, Obama will have to listen to the activists who have done so much to support his presidential campaign. He has empowered people who are the change we’ve been waiting for.

This to me seems as deluded as saying that the civil rights legislation of 1964 happened because the “community concluded it was time for a change.  The President merely signed the papers.”

I am not old enough to remember 1964, but I challenge any Obama supporter to find me one historian of that period who will agree with that contention. The fact is, LBJ dragged Congress kicking and screaming to do much more on civil rights than probably any other president could have gotten passed.

Don’t discount the importance of presidential leadership. People were out in the streets protesting the Vietnam War for years before we finally got out of there.

If Obama gets elected, he will not have the clout with Congress that LBJ had. But even if he did, I simply don’t see Obama as the kind of leader who would go to the mat to push a strong progressive agenda through a resistant Congress. He seems more likely to move halfway toward the Republican position, then declare victory.

Like I always say, I would love to be proven wrong if Obama does manage to get by John McCain. But don’t imagine that the people-powered movement will be calling the shots, and President Obama will just be signing the papers.

It’s hard to keep up with all the reasons to oppose John McCain. Last night I wrote about his opposition to a bill that would make it easier for victims of job discrimination to seek legal redress.

If you care about that issue, you can sign the petition on “Equal Pay for Equal Work” at Momsrising.org.

Meanwhile, I learned from this diary by TomP that Friends of the Earth Action is running an ad against McCain on CNN. The ad highlights McCain’s support for the nuclear power industry:

TomP’s diary also includes this great quote from Friends of the Earth Action president Dr. Brent Blackwalder:

You know how self righteous John McCain can be when he talks about corporate pork and earmarks, but do you know why he opposes the Lieberman-Warner global warming bill?  He plans to vote against it not because it could lavish $1 trillion on the profitable oil, gas and coal industries, but because he wants to add hundreds of billions of dollars more in earmarks for the nuclear industry!

On a related note, I got an e-mail today from the Sierra Club slamming McCain’s proposal to suspend the federal gas tax between Memorial Day and Labor Day. The Sierra Club notes that the real effect of that policy would be to

[r]aise oil company profits by another 18 cents per gallon — by eliminating the federal gas tax without guaranteeing that Big Oil won’t just keep prices high and take the difference to grow their record profits even more.

The Sierra Club also has an online petition you can sign, which sends this message to McCain:

The best way to deal with high gas prices is to cut, not expand, giveaways to Big Oil. Please vote to end taxpayer-funded subsidies and tax breaks for Big Oil and use that money to invest in clean, renewable energy.

Earlier this week, I got the latest newsletter from Smart Growth America, which also blasted McCain’s proposal to declare a summer holiday from the federal gas tax:

An artificial and temporary reduction of gas prices will simply guarantee that absolutely no money goes towards having suitable roads and bridges for those filled-up cars to drive on – not to mention alternatives to congestion, like commuter rail and transit. Instead, we can send the full price of gasoline directly into the pockets of oil companies. (An estimated $10 billion in transportation revenue would be lost, or enough to fully fund Amtrak rail service for 6 years or so.) Meanwhile, we fall farther behind in maintaining our infrastructure: Rust doesn’t take the summer off.

But that’s not all. To coincide with McCain’s photo-op in New Orleans’ Ninth Ward today, Moveon.org Political Action launched its own online petition calling on McCain to reject the endorsement of right-wing pastor John Hagee. I knew about Hagee’s anti-Catholic bigotry, but I wasn’t aware that Hagee once said, “Hurricane Katrina was, in fact, the judgment of God against the city of New Orleans.”

Surely there couldn’t be any more shameful news about McCain to emerge within this 24-hour period, right? Wrong. I learned from Natasha Chart’s post at MyDD today that during a recent visit to Alabama, McCain’s campaign used free prison labor to get out of paying to set up for a private fundraiser.

I guess a campaign that is way behind its Democratic rivals in fundraising has to save money wherever it can.

But it would be more honest for McCain to curtail all campaign spending between now and the Republican National Convention this summer, because he is not complying with limits imposed by his decision to take public financing last year.

If I’ve missed any recent disgraceful behavior coming from the McCain camp, please let me know in the comments section.

One of the worst rulings the Roberts Court has handed down was in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. The five-member conservative majority ruled that the plaintiff lost her right to file a discrimination complaint related to unequal pay because she didn’t file the lawsuit within 180 days of the first discriminatory action by her employer.

Never mind that Lilly Ledbetter didn’t know for many years that she was being short-changed by her employer, which was paying male colleagues substantially more for doing the same job.

The U.S. House passed a bill seeking to remedy this egregious ruling last July. The Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act

would put into law a clarification – wage disparity based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, and disability is not a one-time occurrence. Every discriminatory paycheck represents an ongoing violation. Employees would still have 180 days to challenge the discrimination, but from the last check, not the first.

You would think everyone would recognize the value of this bill. Does it make sense for the courts to grant legal immunity to employers that manage to keep their discriminatory behavior a secret for many months? Or does it make sense to allow employees to file a lawsuit within 180 days of the time they have learned about the violations?

The U.S. Senate took up this bill today, and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama took time off from the presidential campaign to go back to Washington and vote for it.

But John McCain skipped the vote. Though 56 Senators voted in favor, Republicans were able to block it with a filibuster. McCain confirmed today that he would have opposed this bill if he’d been in the Senate chamber:

“I am all in favor of pay equity for women, but this kind of legislation, as is typical of what’s being proposed by my friends on the other side of the aisle, opens us up to lawsuits for all kinds of problems,” the expected GOP presidential nominee told reporters. “This is government playing a much, much greater role in the business of a private enterprise system.”

Right, he’s “all in favor” of equal pay–he just doesn’t want women who are denied equal pay to be able to seek legal remedy for that discrimination.

Clearly wage discrimination doesn’t bother McCain nearly as much as the idea that we might have more women filing lawsuits against employers who have been cheating them for years.

If you know any women who might lean toward McCain because they think he is a reasonable moderate, let them know about his stand on this issue.

Democracy for America sent out an e-mail yesterday highlighting this new video, “Condi Must Go,” from Brave New Films:

Watch the video and see how many times she told Congress that the U.S. does not condone torture, would not condone torture, has never condoned torture, and so on.

Note that she didn’t say that we do not torture. That’s because Rice presided over high-level meetings at which torture methods were explicitly discussed and authorized.

No, we don’t “condone” torture, because that would be illegal. We just break the law and order prisoners to be tortured without “condoning” the practice.

She is a disgrace and should resign. Sign the petition at:

www.condimustgo.com

By the way, do any of Congressman Boswell’s supporters out there want to defend his vote for the Military Commissions Act? You know, that bill that “gave the President the ultimate authority to determine which interrogation techniques qualify as ‘torture.’” The bill that more than 80 percent of Boswell’s fellow House Democrats opposed.

Congressman Leonard Boswell has been re-branding himself lately as someone who is “standing up to George Bush” and “taking on George Bush for the change we need”.

Which would be great, except that on some of the most important votes he has cast during the Bush presidency, Boswell has sided with George Bush and the Republican majority, rather than with the majority of his fellow House Democrats.

Today Ed Fallon’s campaign put out a press release highlighting one of those votes in connection with recent reports that Bush appointees at the highest level were involved in approving acts of torture.

Here is an excerpt:

Fallon notes his opponent Leonard Boswell, a member of the House Select Committee on Intelligence, has publicly expressed his disapproval of torture. “Unfortunately, it’s clear that his voting record is inconsistent with his public position,” says Fallon.

According to Congressional voting records, Congressman Boswell voted for the Military Commissions Act (S.3930, 09/27/06), which gave the President the ultimate authority to determine which interrogation techniques qualify as ‘torture.’ Fallon says, “Boswell sided with Bush and broke with 82% of House Democrats who voted against this bill.”

The Military Commissions Act also permits the admission of statements into evidence that were obtained by torture, as well as giving retroactive immunity to any officials who authorized acts of torture. It also suspends habeas corpus, allowing the government to detain hundreds of prisoners for years without ever filing charges against them.

The press release also notes that Boswell has to date declined to sign on to H.R. 952, which would prohibit the “extraordinary rendition” of people in U.S. custody to countries where they will be tortured.

I would like one Boswell supporter reading this to put up a comment or diary defending the incumbent’s vote on the Military Commissions Act. Explain to me why Boswell was right to let Bush appointees authorize torture, and let the president order people to be arrested and held without charges indefinitely.

The full text of Fallon’s press release is after the jump.

Friday, April 11, 7pm to 8 pm: House party for Ed Fallon at the home of Gene and Lucy Krauss, 3660 Grand Ave. apt. 240, Des Moines. RSVP to Jamie at (515) 822-4284.

Saturday, April 12, starting at 11 am: Young College Democrats Conference at Grinnell College. Ed Fallon will be speaking there, but I don’t know what else is on the program.

Saturday, April 12, 7 pm: “Clarence Darrow: The Search for Justice,” First Christian Church, 2500 University Ave. in Des Moines. “Gary Anderson, nationally renowned portrayer of Clarence Darrow, depicts the man many consider the most brilliant person ever to argue law.  Darrow was famous for his work in the Scopes “Monkey” Trial.  He fought against the death penalty, social injustice, racism, conspiracy laws, and civil liberties violations.” Co-sponsored by First Christian Church and the Interfaith Alliance of Iowa. Tickets are available at the door and cost $10 for students and $20 for other adults.

Also, if you are the parent of children under the age of 10, you may want to come hear Justin Roberts and his Not Ready for Naptime Players at 11 am on Saturday, April 12, at the Masonic temple in downtown Des Moines (on Park between 5th and 6th). Justin is a Des Moines native (Roosevelt High School class of 1988) and is one of the best children’s songwriters around. Really, even adults enjoy his music! The concert is a fundraiser for the Des Moines Symphony Academy–tickets cost $15.

Please consider this an open thread for posting about any other interesting event coming up soon.

The national organization eQualityGiving, “The Online Donor Community for LGBT Equality,” has endorsed Ed Fallon in the Democratic primary in Iowa’s third Congressional district. A press release from Fallon’s campaign notes that eQualityGiving has endorsed only nine federal candidates this year, and that Fallon is the “only candidate in the nation to earn this endorsement twice.”

The full text of the release from Fallon’s campaign is after the jump.

Yesterday, I did a piece entitled Obama: The Only Thing You Need to Know.  It was a big success, and everyone seemed to like taking a focus on the constitutional law aspect of Obama's career. 

Today, I've decided to take out my looking glass again and focus it on Obama's time as a civil rights attorney.  At a time when our civil rights are being taken for granted by the government that is sworn to protect them, it would be nice to have a President who has defended them in court.

“[Miner Barnhill & Galland]'s a real do-good firm,” says Fay Clayton, lead counsel for the National Organization for Women in a landmark lawsuit aimed at stopping abortion clinic violence. “Barack and that firm were a perfect fit. He wasn't going to make as much money there as he would at a LaSalle Street firm or in New York, but money was never Barack's first priority anyway.”

– http://www.boston.com/news/nation/ar…

A few more examples beneath the fold…

cross-posted on MyDD.com and Dailykos

The progressive blogosphere has been absolutely critical in recent months in helping Democrats keep the pressure on the Bush Administration and Republicans on a wide range of issues. I witnessed the incredible power of your efforts first hand last week when I spoke with you about the Republican filibuster of the Levin-Reed Amendment. The words of encouragement and gratitude that you expressed towards me in that post were truly overwhelming and I cannot thank you enough for your kind words.

I am writing to you today because an issue that is very dear to me is under attack and I need your help.

As many of you may know, my late brother lost his hearing at a young age and I witnessed firsthand the difficulties people with disabilities endure everyday. It was that experience that drove me to work hard to ensure civil rights protections were extended to every individual regardless of a current, past, or perceived disability through the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act seventeen years ago.

In the end, it wasn’t even close!

Here’s the e-mail I just got from The Interfaith Alliance of Iowa:

Dear Friends and Activists,

I am so thrilled that the Iowa House of Representatives passed the Civil Rights bill tonight, adding sexual orientation and gender identity to the Iowa Civil Rights Code.  The bi-partisan vote was 59 – 37!  What a tremendous accomplishment for this Legislature and what an amazing step forward in making Iowa a truly welcoming state!

Your calls, emails and contacts with Legislators made a difference!  Thank you so much for ALL of your work on this important and historic legislation.  It was so important that Legislators heard our collective progressive voice standing for Civil Rights for all people.

The Civil Rights bill adds sexual orientation and gender identity to the Iowa Civil Rights Code to prohibit discriminatory employment, public accommodation, housing, education and credit practices.  An amendment was added to the bill so it will need to go back to the Senate but it is expected to pass and the Governor is expected to sign the bill into law.

Don’t forget to contact the Representatives that voted yes for Civil Rights and thank them for their vote!  The Yes votes include:

Democrats

Abdul-Samad, Bailey, Bell, Berry, Bukta, Cohoon, Dandekar, Davitt, Foege, Ford, Frevert, Gaskill, Gayman, Heddens, Hunter, Huser, Jacoby, Jochum, Kelley, Kressig, Kuhn, Lensing, Lykam, Mascher, McCarthy, Miller H., Oldson, Olson D., Olson R., Olson T., Palmer, Petersen, Reasoner, Reichert, Schueller, Shomshor, Smith, Staed, Swaim, Taylor D., Taylor T., Thomas, Wendt, Wenthe, Wessel-Kroeschell, Whitaker, Whitead, Winckler, Wise, Murphy

Republicans

Clute, Forristall, Hoffman , Jacobs , Miller L., Raecker, Schickel, Struyk, Wiencek

Thank you for making a difference!

Connie

Connie Ryan Terrell

Executive Director

The Interfaith Alliance of Iowa & Action Fund

“promoting the positive and healing role of religion in public life…”

PO Box 41086

Des Moines, IA  50311

Office: 515-279-8715

Fax: 515-279-2232

www.iowatia.org

tiaiowa@dwx.com

Thanks to everyone who contacted their legislators.

I am so pleasantly surprised that my Republican House rep, Dan Clute, and my Republican Senator Pat Ward both voted for this bill. I honestly didn’t expect it.

I just received an e-mail from The Interfaith Alliance of Iowa. The Civil Rights bill hangs in the balance, and the time to e-mail your representatives in the Iowa House is now (Tuesday or Wednesday). Or, you can call during the day on Wednesday.

After the jump, I’ve posted the full text of the e-mail, as well as talking points about the legislation and information on how to contact your legislator by phone or e-mail.

If you believe in ending discrimination against the GLBT community, please act on this appeal.

On Saturday I talked to a woman I know who is involved with the effort to get anti-discrimination language regarding gays and lesbians into the State Civil Rights bill.

The Iowa Senate overwhelmingly passed this bill. There are plenty of votes in the House to pass it, but Republican leader Chris Rants won’t let any Republicans vote for it until at least 51 of the 56 Democrats say they will vote for it.

The Des Moines Register’s David Yepsen heard the same thing and wrote about it in the Sunday paper:

This Legislature has yet to approve anti-discrimination protections for gays and lesbians in housing and employment because of a political game House Republicans are playing.

They want Democrats to put up 51 votes from their members before any GOP lawmakers will vote for it. (This is being done so Democrats from conservative districts are on record casting a tough vote that will then be used against them by conservative Republican challengers in the 2008 election.)

John Deeth put up this post on Friday about GLBT activists in Iowa City who are angry with House Majority leader Pat Murphy about this. I don’t blame them.

The bottom line, though, is that the House Democrats need to hear from lots of people on this issue. They’ve been raising money from the GLBT community, and those who favor equal rights for gays and lesbians, for years. It is wrong for Democrats to run scared on this issue, but if they think that our side is going to give them a pass on it, they might be more inclined to play it safe.

I encourage everyone to contact the House leadership (Pat Murphy and Kevin McCarthy) about this. I have heard that Geri Huser of Altoona is also on the fence, so if you live in her district, give her a call or send an e-mail. I don’t know who the other wavering House Democrats are. If you know, please leave that information in the comments section.

You can call the House Switchboard at (515) 281-3221 and ask to be connected to any of the representatives.