July 2005

Pantagraph to Weller: Abstain

The Pantagraph runs a strong editorial calling on Jerry Weller to abstain from the vote on CAFTA. Weller is married to Zury Rios Sosa, a Guatemalan lawmaker and the conflict of interest should be obvious.

However, it could look like his vote is influenced by his wife serving in the government of another country that is party to the pact.

We don’t know what kind of ethics laws Guatemala has or whether the Guatemalan Congress would vote on CAFTA. But it would seem Weller’s wife should excuse herself from a vote there, too.

Nearly a year ago, when Weller’s engagement to Rios Sosa became a campaign issue, Weller spokesman Telly Lovelace said, “If there is any obvious conflict of interest, Congressman Weller will do what’s appropriate.”

This is his first test.

The “appropriate” thing for him to do is sit out this vote

Where I disagree is what his first test was–shaving.

His second test was continuing his membership on the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee and continuing as Vice Chairman on that subcommittee.

His wife isn’t just any random lawmaker. She represents the Party of her father )(he founded the party) and when Rios Montt ran for President in 2003 (and the Bush administration admirably opposed him because of his genocidal history) Zury R?os Sosa spoke before him at rallies and serves in the Guatemalan Legislature under his party. During that campaign, the FRG Party rioted to have Rios Montt included in the vote after being banned for being the head of the 1982 coup.

And damn funny that her web site has her going by a different name:
http://www.zuryrios.com/: Zury Rios Montt.

Even more bizarre is that the majority of her adult career has been supporting the party of her father starting in 1989 when he founded the FRG:

1989-1990. Public Relations Secretary of the political party Frente Republicano Guatemalteco (FRG) in the presidential campaign.

Weller has tried to say she isn’t her father, which in a strict sense is true, but everything about her career is about supporting her father, a genocidal dictator and political thug. He held up his hand with purple paint to signify his solidarity to the Iraqi people–too bad he has no such solidarity those in Guatemala who faced the same kind of persecution Saddam practiced.

What Have Unions Done for You Lately?

Over at TPMCafe, Nathan Newman’s post on unions and liberal support of them is causing a ruckus. A rather weird one at that.

One of the threads of discontent is that knowledge based workers don’t get anything out of that—Bullshit. Look down to SEIU’s efforts to organize home child care workers and notice that such people take care of children, and probably the children of people who work in such businesses in the lessor paying jobs. If it wasn’t for SEIU’s work, the home child care worker would be less well paid and those at the lower end of the wage scale would either not have child care available or it would be worse quality. The state on it’s own has little reason to increase the rate, but SEIU has provided a benefit for all of us by improving pay for the home child care workers and in turn, quality will improve over time with other initiatives. Early childhood education efforts are critical to childhood development and carries one of the larger economic returns of any public investment.

Of course, often knowledge workers find many benefits from union representation.

Beyond, that there is some whining about how unions can’t help improve skills for laborers, which is one of the most ignorant statements ever uttered for those familiar with labor unions and how the apprentice systems they utilize as well as work SEIU has done to improve the quality of child care workers. Much of the skilled labor in this country is taught through union efforts including trade schools and the apprentice system.

There are many criticisms to make of unions, but for Democrats to think they are useless strikes me as an amazing ignorance of what unions do for individual workers as well as their efforts to push for better working conditions. As screwed up as OSHA is, it’s a hell of a lot better than relying on individual companies for worker safety. Unions are the ones that got it put in place.

Digby points out the importance of public employee unions:

These are middle class American workers who have not, contrary to Republican lies, become lazy, fat and opportunistic with their huge salaries that pay oh, 50k a year. These are cops, firemen, nurses and teachers who are trying to work in increasingly difficult circumstances without any hope of ever getting rich. Indeed, many of these people chose their jobs because they actually give a damn. And they tend to support Democrats for a reason — because Democrats support them. You don’t have to have a Phd from MIT to understand how this thing works.

Atrios chimes in with a very practical point:

The current model of politics is unlikely to be overturned anytime soon. The netroots may complement it and may supplement it, but they’re unlikely to replace it. Unions can do what is necessary – put bodies in position at key moments. When a candidate is running for local or statewide office, it’s absolutely vital to get bodies at events. Bodies equal audiences, audiences equal press coverage.

That certainly isn’t the only role unions play, but it’s one which is hard to duplicate.

A Confederate Memorial? In Illinois?

James Barr, the Chicago-based adjutant general for Military Order of the Stars & Bars, a Confederate organization, said a public forum is not warranted.

“I can see no reason to have a public debate on that issue,” he said. “I’m aware of no other monument erection that was done with a public debate.”

You are right, there is no reason for a public debate over a monument that has absolutely no business in the State of Illinois. I’m sure Mississippi has some nice real estate for you.

Can I protect a Source when subpeonaed?

If not, then why should Miller and Cooper be excused? This question is what led me to change my mind on the case. If someone gave me information on an agent and I then published it, I shouldn’t be given privilege–it would turn the law against outing classified assets into nothing more than a scofflaw that one could circumvent all too easily by finding an individual to set up a blog and then leaking it.

The Constitution doesn’t specify that the press is made up of people with credentials from a J School or backed by a large corporate media or even a printing press. It guarantees freedom of the press, but that doesn’t mean the press doesn’t have the same obligation as other citizens.

The mistake many make is thinking of the press as some institution that exists apart from the average citizen, but that’s a relatively recent and uncommon convention brought about by the rise of corporate media. Traditionally, party activists were the media. Traditionally, small town papers were guys who bought a printing press and printed away. Traditionally, the idea of an objective press that is unbiased (a very bad choice of words) was unknown.

I happen to think the professionalization of the press was very good in many ways and it still works well in large print venues. That it is good in such contexts doesn’t mean that the 1st Amendment Guarantees are limited to such press, however.

No one who understands what the press was at the time of the Founders would think only that those with ‘credentials’ would be given that freedom–especially when three guys were writing under Publius in little pamphlets that we could never imagine not being considered under the freedom of the press.

That freedom was a freedom from official sanction for what they say–such as partisan screeds against the government. Nothing in that right guarantees someone not cooperate with a legal proceeding with which every other citizen would be required to cooperate. The press can print what it likes, but it isn’t above the law.

Rant motivated by Steve Chapman’s column on the matter.

Big Quarter for Roskam IL-06

Interesting numbers:

Republican state Sen. Peter Roskam, hoping to replace retiring Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.), banked nearly $400,000 in his first quarter of fundraising, according to the Roskam campaign.

Roskam?s fundraising total for the three-month period from April 1 through June 30 will put him way ahead of any of his possible rivals for the GOP nomination in the strongly Republican 6th District outside Chicago.

All candidates must file disclosure reports with the Federal Election Commission by July 15.

Roskam now has more than $370,000 cash on hand, drawn from approximately 420 donors, including 100 who donated more than $90,000 online ? figures more closely resembling those of a Senate candidate rather than those of a state lawmaker hoping to get elected to the House.

$90,000 on-line? Jeesh, he’s got some good mailing lists for conservative activists. It’ll be interesting to check out the contributions report at the FEC when it goes live.

I’ll handicap this race with Roskam as a clear favorite until we see Pankau offer up a compelling message and some evidence of strong widespread support. Roskam seems to have the network and money for now.

And Dems are happy with that–though we need to funnel a lot of money to the eventual candidate in the 6th.

Not sure what the last two paragraphs mean, but they are interesting given they are in The Hill.

Last year, Cegelis?s campaign did better than expected at the polls, winning more than 44 percent of the vote. That prompted Democrats to take a hard look at the seat, with many saying that Rep. Rahm Emmanuel (D), chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), would make the race a priority, given that it?s in his home state of Illinois.

Cegelis is running on a pro-business, results-oriented platform similar to that of Rep. Melissa Bean, the Democrat who beat Crane in one of the biggest upsets of 2004, Democrats familiar with the district say.

I Told You Patrick Fitzgerald Wouldn’t Go Soft on the Plame Investigation

I have no idea if Rove is in trouble and I don’t care that much–he’ll get his soon if he was responsible. However, I remember some people questioning my belief that Patrick Fitzgerald would pursue this investigation fully–take a look at where he wants Judith Miller to spend her time.

Fitzgerald is an oddball in Illinois not because he’s an outsider, but he’s one of those true believers in the law. He’s shown no tolerance for anyone who doesn’t respect it as much as he does and whomever outed Plame is in a lot of trouble.