THE PROGRESS REPORT
by Christy Harvey, Judd Legum and Jonathan Baskin with Nico Pitney and Mipe Okunseinde
May 10, 2005
JUDICIARY
Unclean Hands
Yesterday, President Bush marked the four-year anniversary of his first nominations to the federal court of appeals. Since that time, the Senate has confirmed 207 of Bush's judicial nominees. Just 10 nominees have not received a vote on the floor. It's an excellent record compared to those of past presidents. Sen. Chuck Hegel (R-NE) noted on Sunday that "[t]he Republicans' hands aren't clean on this.... What we did with Bill Clinton's nominees -- about 62 of them -- we just didn't give them votes in committee or we didn't bring them up." Nevertheless, the Washington Times reports that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist "plans for Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen to be the judicial nomination on which he uses the 'nuclear option,'" dispensing with 200 years of Senate tradition and abolishing the right of the minority party to filibuster judicial nominees.
GONZALES' REVISIONIST HISTORY: In a press conference yesterday, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales expressed his support for Priscilla Owen, adding, "I've never accused her of being an activist judge." Yet, when both Gonzales and Owen sat on the Texas Supreme Court, Gonzales called one of her opinions "an unconscionable act of judicial activism." In another case Gonzales accused Owen of attempting to "judicially amend the statute."
NO LICENSE TO COMPROMISE: In an effort to avoid a constitutional crisis, Minority Leader Harry Reid charitably offered "support for one of President Bush's judicial nominees" who had previously been blocked. Sadly, the least objectionable nominee from this group Reid could come up with was Thomas Griffith. Last summer the Washington Post reported that Griffith "has been practicing law in Utah without a state law license for the past four years," after his DC bar license expired for failure to pay dues. Mark Foster, an attorney who represents lawyers in ethics matters, "said Griffith's two licensing lapses should disqualify him from a lifetime appointment to one of the nation's most important federal benches."
FRIST'S HISTORY OF FILIBUSTERS: Majority Leader Bill Frist said Griffith wasn't enough. Yesterday, Frist noted there are "seven other highly qualified nominees who have been filibustered in the 108th Congress who deserve an up or down vote as well. I remain committed to this fundamental principle and the return to 214 years of Senate tradition." Just five years ago, Frist had a much different view. On 3/8/00 Frist participated in a judicial filibuster of Judge Richard Paez, Bill Clinton's nominee to the 9th Circuit of the United States Court of Appeals. A press release issued the following day confirmed that the purpose of the filibuster was to "block" Paez's nomination.
THE NUCLEAR FALLOUT -- CHIEF JUSTICE CLARENCE THOMAS: Ultimately, the nuclear option isn't about Priscilla Owen, Thomas Griffith, Terrence Boyle or any other nominee to the federal circuit courts. It's about the Supreme Court. Bush, Frist and their allies want to be able to install judges on the Supreme Court without even token support from the opposition. The "rule change also enhances the chances, for instance, of a conservative such as Justice Clarence Thomas being elevated to chief justice if William H. Rehnquist steps down after this session."
MEDICAID
Sickening Priorities
Washington conservatives are firmly placing their boot onto the necks of the most vulnerable Americans -- poor children, the elderly, pregnant women, and people with HIV/AIDS. Under the cover of high-profile fights over Social Security privatization and judicial filibusters, Congress has voted to slash Medicaid -- the country's premier health program for the poor -- by $10 billion over the next five years. Now, with the budget-crunching over, governors and state legislators have devised "sweeping changes" to deal with Congress's cuts, under which many low-income Americans will have to pay more for care and states will have "more latitude" to reduce and limit services. Governor Mike Huckabee (R-AR) put these priorities in perspective: "[T]o balance the federal budget off the backs of the poorest people in the country is simply unacceptable. You don't pull feeding tubes from people. You don't pull the wheelchair out from under the child with muscular dystrophy."
FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY A LA CARTE: Why target Medicaid to begin with? Conservatives claim it's all about reducing the federal deficit, and point to the fact that federal and state spending on Medicaid has "grown an average of 10 percent a year over the last five years -- much faster than federal or state revenues." But the reasons behind that growth show that targeting Medicaid is regressive and unnecessary. Medicaid has actually "contained spending, limiting annual per capita growth to 6.7 percent between 2002 and 2004," compared to 12.5 percent for private health insurance premiums. Its overall costs have increased because "enrollment grew by nearly 40 percent since 2000" thanks to the recession that "left many families without health coverage, squeezing states." Without Medicaid, the number of uninsured would have been much higher. Meanwhile, conservatives have cleared the way for $106 billion in new tax cuts over five years (as part of a budget that will "increase deficits over the next five years by $168 billion") while moving forward with pork-packed energy and transportation bills.
PICKING ON THE WEAK: So what's the real reason for going after Medicaid? Political analysts say "congressional leaders picked a program whose low-income beneficiaries were relatively less politically active. 'The poor and the disadvantaged do not vote,' said Rogan Kersh, a political science professor at Syracuse University who follows health-care issues."
THE DEEPEST CUTS: The severity of America's health care crisis is seen most vividly in the extreme moves some states are making to deal with cuts in Medicaid funding. A few states have pushed through wholesale cuts in coverage; Tennessee is dropping more than 300,000 people from its Medicaid rolls, while Missouri is cutting off 90,000. Meanwhile, New Hampshire yesterday became the first state in the nation to make "the poorest of the poor -- even families with no income at all -- contribute to their coverage." (Oregon tried a similar strategy two years ago, charging $6 to $20 a month for poor adults in an optional program, and "enrollment dropped by half in less than a year, from 100,000 to 51,000.") A newspaper in New Hampshire called the proposal an 'infamous moment' in the state history "comparable to the time a state senator suggested homosexuals should be allowed to donate blood 'as long as they donated all of it.'" (See American Progress's state-by-state analysis of the Medicaid cuts.)
IMPROVING MEDICAID THE RIGHT WAY: Plenty of options exist to improve Medicaid's performance without cost shifting to states or reducing coverage for people in need. A report by the Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured reveals that all fifty states and the District of Columbia enacted some form of cost-containment measures in response to the rising cost of Medicaid in the past two years. American Progress has compiled some of the most progressive of these measures, like basic drug reimportation programs, multi-state prescription purchasing pools, and small business health insurance pools. Read about them in our issue brief on "Improving Medicaid's Performance."
HEALTH -- EPA GIVES LEAD PAINT REGULATIONS A WHITEWASH: The Environmental Protection Agency is quietly sacrificing the health of kids in order to save businesses a few bucks. Exposure to lead paint, usually through home renovations, threatens the health of 1.4 million children every year. In 2000, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated almost half a million children had dangerous levels of lead in their blood; minority kids were disproportionately affected. Safety regulations were supposed to be in place by this year. The EPA, however, secretly decided to delay completing the regulations; instead, they want to make standards voluntary. Why? The EPA says it's worried about how much complying with regulations would cost businesses. Even if the agency is more concerned with cash than the health of children, that argument doesn't wash. Complying with the regulations would cost industries between $1.7 billion to $3.1 billion a year; a separate agency estimate shows implementing lead-paint regulations would provide health benefits from $2.7 billion to $4.2 billion annually.
BOLTON -- A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON AN OLD PROBLEM: The hearty endorsement of John Bolton given by former Deputy Secretary Of State Richard L. Armitage certainly surprised Larry Wilkerson, chief of staff to then-Secretary of State Colin Powell. According to testimony by Wilkerson, Armitage had "frequent battles with Bolton over his diplomatic tone" until ultimately blocking Bolton "from delivering speeches and testimony unless they were personally approved by Mr. Armitage." It was two years ago that such tight restrictions were laid down -- and only on Bolton -- and "'if anything, they got more stringent' as time went on." In another interview, the former director of the National Intelligence Council described Bolton as an individual who "took isolated facts and made much more of them to build a case than [Hutchings] thought the intelligence warranted. It was a sort of cherry-picking of little factoids and little isolated bits that were drawn out to present the starkest-possible case." Though providing barely half the Bolton-related documents requested by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the State Department continues to stress that all of Bolton's speeches were cleared; however, "such battles create 'a climate of intimidation and culture of conformity that is damaging.'"
HEALTH CARE -- NO SUCH THING AS A SUBSIDIZED LUNCH: Under President Bush's new Medicare prescription drug benefit program, "elderly people with low incomes may lose some of their food stamps if they sign up." Though seniors are often forced to choose between their medication and other life necessities, administration officials are rationalizing the shortchanging by claiming that "older Americans will spend less of their own money on drugs and will therefore have more to spend on food, reducing their need for food stamps." It seems that the so-called Medicare prescription drug benefit savings is a fancy way of saying reshuffling to America's oldest and most vulnerable.
IRAQ -- SECURITY AS MAJOR ROADBLOCK TO RECONSTRUCTION: Conclusions from a report being released today by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction state "U.S. efforts to rebuild Iraq are being hindered by management lapses and security problems, including mounting casualties among foreign contractors." The "$18.4 billion rebuilding effort [is] the largest undertaken by the U.S. since the end of World War II," yet there is not much to show for it. "For example, while billions of dollars have been used to improve Iraq's power supply, the country's electric system remains unable to meet demand." A large part of the problem is also "widespread management failings and isolated instances of apparent corruption, fraud and embezzlement." It is believed that this "slow pace of restoring the country's infrastructure and essential services is considered a prime source of Iraqis' public anger at the U.S. and skepticism about Iraq's government." The report's final conclusion: "The threat to life and property continues to be a major barrier to the reconstruction and rehabilitation of Iraq."
HOUSING -- AIN'T NOTHIN' UP BUT THE RENT: A new White House proposal recently introduced in Congress -- the "State and Local Housing Flexibility Act" -- could leave a lot of Americans out in the cold. The legislation will make "fundamental changes" to two major U.S. low-income housing assistance programs, the housing choice voucher program and public housing. And according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, these changes will dangerously lay the ground for "future cuts in funding for housing assistance and leave the more than 3 million low-income households assisted by these programs vulnerable to sharp rent increases and other harmful changes."
DAILY GRILL
"I've never accused her [Pricilla Owen] of being an activist judge." -- Alberto Gonzales, 5/9/05
VERSUS
"An unconscionable act of judicial activism." -- Alberto Gonzales, then a member of the Texas Supreme Court, on Pricilla Owen's opinion, 6/22/00
DAILY OUTRAGE
New York Times columnist John Tienery complains that the media spends too much time covering suicide bomb attacks. Tienery argues that if the media scaled back coverage, people would understand "that their odds of being killed by a terrorist are minuscule in Iraq."