From: Daniel M. Lee, Ed.D.
Re: President Barack Obama to Speak to America's StudentsOn September 8, 2009 at 12:00 PM, President Barack Obama will deliver a national address to students across the nation. Early press releases indicate the President will speak to children at youth about persisting and succeeding in school. Additionally, the President will challenge students to work hard, set educational goals, and take responsibility for their learning.
The U.S. Department of Education is encouraging students, teachers, and administrators to participate by watching the president deliver the address which will be broadcast on the White House Web site (http://www.whitehouse.gov/live/) and on C-SPAN.
Unfortunately, it simply isn't practical to have students and teachers view the speech as it would be a significant disruption at a critical time of the year. Therefore, I am alerting families about the speech so, if they choose, they may record it. The speech will also be available later for download at http://www.whitehouse.gov/mediaresources/ as well as on www.ed.gov.
In this way families can view the speech together and discuss the President's points. Thank you for your interest in this matter.
First, this ticks me off because Dr. Lee waited until Friday afternoon to make the announcement, so that we couldn't argue with him.
Second, this irks me because he's claiming that the second week of school -- a short week, thanks to Labor Day -- is a "critical time of the year".
Third, this gives me displeasure because he's assuming that people have VCRs hooked up to record it, and cable to have something to record. At the moment, I have neither.
Tuesday morning, I will be on the phone (or maybe at the office in person, but I doubt it), and I won't be polite. I just wish it would do some good.
(Note: Dr. Lee had more to say at http://www.mpbn.net/News/MaineNews/tabid/181/ctl/ViewItem/mid/3475/ItemI.... Now, if he had sent _that_ home, instead of the pablum above, I might not be quite as annoyed.)
]]>You warned us from the beginning not to expect too much. You told us that you were a centrist.
OK, we said. You are intelligent, you understand constitutional law, you are inspiring, you speak of real change, you are saying all the right things about special interests. You are a natural leader. We want you to be the leader of all of us.
You were everything that George Bush was not.
You gave us hope.
We understood.
But today, Mr. President, we are devastated.
We were forgiving when you compromised on FISA.
We understood, you had to get elected, you didn't want to spook those who were still scared, and you didn't want to make this an issue.
We were puzzled when you appointed the guys from Goldman Sachs to run the economy.
OK, we knew these guys are smart and they have experience. They do understand how the system works. We gave you the benefit of the doubt on this.
We were patient when you asked us to be patient on Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
Well, we still don't really understand why you can't end this now, but at least we know you're committed to fixing this. Most of us said we'd be patient.
We cheered when you vowed to shut down Guantánamo within twelve months.
Maybe a little longer than we'd hoped, but at least you've given a firm commitment.
We were concerned about what we were getting into with the increased mobilization in Afghanistan.
But you ran on this during your campaign, and nobody really knows the best answer for this. We again gave you the benefit of the doubt.
And we were thrilled at the real prospect of health system reform.
Maybe not what many had hoped for, but we were going to get real reform, real structural changes in the system, a real Public Option, a new paradigm.
But then, Mr. President, but then, things started going not so well.
First there were the second thoughts about indefinite detentions without charge or trial. And whether Guántanmo would really shut down within twelve months.
OK, the fools and cowards in Congress threw you a lead anchor on this. We know you'll do the best you can.
We heard you loudly and clearly about wanting to move forward, and not look backward.
But we remain increasingly alarmed, as more and more comes out about torture, rendition, the shredding of our Constitution, and now the alleged abuses of Blackwater, that we will never restore the precedent that the rule of law must come first, and can never be abrogated with impunity by an Executive branch that has claimed unaccountable power, beyond the rule of law.
And transparency, Mr. President. You promised transparency.
And you are more and more defending the idea that we can't afford transparency. That it's a luxury, not something we should expect of our government.
Then there was the DOJ brief not merely defending DOMA, but using language that would have made Sean Hannity proud.
What was that all about?? Was this a Bush mole run amok at DOJ?
We expected the pushback from the right on health system reform, albeit nobody quite expected the ferocity of the hatred and venom.
But at least we can understand where it's coming from. So, we'll be out there at all the town halls, we will mobilize, we will defend, we'll use calm logic where the other side uses slander and lies, we'll be there defending you and defending health system reform.
But despite all this, the talk of "bipartisanship" has continued, relentlessly, when it is clear as the New Mexico sky on a cold December morning that this would buy you nothing -- that maybe with one or two exceptions, the Republicans will oppose you every step of the way on this, and will extract concessions that would gut the bill.
And with this, Mr. President, we started to see the writing on the wall.
And at the same time, Mr. President, even the Senators like Bingaman and Durban who have supported real reform, who have spoken of the importance of a robust public option, have started to back down, using terms like "on the ropes", that maybe "co-ops are sorta the same thing".
We really, truly don't like this, Mr. President. This is not going well. The writing on the wall looks like it's written in blood now.
Amidst all of this, Mr. President, your Chief of Staff, Mr. Emanuel, decided that he'd had enough of interference from the people who were questioning how all this was going. He decided that it was the moment to exercise his superb powers of diplomacy to look in our direction -- in the direction of progressives, of the people who have given you our all, who sent in millions of donations during the campaign, who have worked for you tirelessly, endlessly, with faith that ultimately, finally, we would have a president who would lead us back from the abyss that we faced after eight long years wandering in the wilderness of ignorance, lies, greed and destruction, with faith that even when you felt you had to compromise, your heart was in the right place and you would do the best you possibly could -- your Chief of Staff looked in our direction, looked right into our eyes and smiled and extended his middle finger.
To this, Mr. President, I cannot begin to even offer a response.
And now, Mr. President, now we are dumbstruck. Over this weekend, we have learned of the deal with Big PhRMA. A deal that George Bush would be proud of -- the deal to buy their support, their advertising dollars, in return for their pledge to cut their profits by a defined margin, but not more than that, and that it would be promised that WE WOULD NEVER SEEK TO NEGOTIATE FOR THE BEST DRUG PRICES. I don't have to outline the details of why this leaves us speechless. Robert Reich spelled that out with great clarity today.
The Barack Obama we voted for in November of 2008, the guy who spoke eloquently of not allowing special interests to run the government, would understand. He wouldn't require Robert Reich or any of us to explain it to him.
This is not reform, Mr. President. It does not even remotely resemble "change". This is business as usual. It sends the message that true change is impossible, that there is no hope at all, that all we can do is capitulate.
Will all due respect, Mr. President, those who love you are all sitting here tonight with tears in our eyes, saying: "WTF, Mr. President. WTF are you doing?"
He stabilized the markets, so 401Ks are starting to slowly come back and we are not about to meltdown anymore. Unemployment numbers are coming down dramatically from when he took over. GDP went from 6.5 shrinkage to 1 shrinkage since he has been in office. Tens of thousands of state employees still have jobs, and services are maintained because of his stimulus.
He ended torture. He IS closing Gitmo.
95% of Americans are receiving a tax DECREASE.
He provided unemployment, food stamps and a 65% reduction in Cobra for those who lost their jobs.
He set new emissions standards.
He protected wilderness land set for oil leases.
He got Pakistan to agree to fight the Taliban, which Bush never could. The top leader was taken out this week.
He nominated and got confirmed the first latina Supreme Court Justice in history.
He signed Equal Pay for Equal Work, Children's Health Bill and Credit Card Reform.
He has a first time home owner's credit, a modification of mortgage plan in place. (This needs work, but it is in place)
He has made it easier for students to get college loans. (UMass just gave a 1500 rebate to all students because of the stimulus money.)
He has improved America's image around the world, especially with Muslim countries.
He got the 2 NK journalists out.
He got the non-proliferation treaties going again, and he will chair the next meeting. Already an agreement exists to reduce Russia's and US's arms.
A significant amount of the bailout money is being paid back. This is a good thing.
He has taken on healthcare, the most difficult thing to pass in the US. I am not completely happy with how he is doing it, but he is doing it.*
He ended the abstinence only thing. And the law that said a pharmacist could refuse to give birth control pills to women if they so chose.
He is sticking to the timetable to withdraw troops from Iraq.
He got funding for the useless bomber cut.And those heliocoptors. He plans to make more weapons' cuts.
He has cut 2 trillion from the budget over the next ten years.
He has taken on energy, the second most difficult thing to pass in the US and it has already passed the House.
He saved the American auto industry. (Cash for clunkers is doing great too, both for the industry and jobs, and for the environment.)
He is building a green economy for the US. First steps in the stimulus, others in the energy bill.
More jobs will be created in transportation when rest of stimulus kicks in in 2010.
He is facing complete disrespect and vilification from the media and the wingnuts,getting more than 30 death threats per day,and still goes on, calmly and with determination and intelligence.
* He has no champions in the Senate, only a small group of obstructionists who seem to have been given all the power by Harry Reid. The insurance industry has convinced people that he is Hitler; and this is only the beginning. If Pharma gets into it, what do you think will happen to healthcare? They have way more money than the insurance companies. You want him to fight all the corporate interests which actually OWN this country, including the Senate and Congress,and you want him to do that virtually alone? The left has attacked him almost from day one. The right is throwing the kitchen sink right now.
I think you have to decide whether he has done enough good in his first seven months to still support him. I think, overwhelmingly, yes.
]]>After meeting with Mr. Obama, Sen. Collins expressed concern about a number of spending provisions, including $780 million for pandemic-flu preparedness. "I have no doubt that the president is willing to negotiate in good faith, that he wants to have a bipartisan bill," Sen. Collins said.
The final amount was about $50 million.
]]>Apparently, the Maine DoE collects information about students disciplined in school as part of their reporting requirements for federal grants. The bill would add a section to state education disclosure law which reads as follows:
A school may not disclose the name of a student involved in prohibited behavior unless specifically required to by state or federal law. The department shall assist a school in conforming to the provisions of this subsection. This subsection may be enforced by a civil action brought by a student or parent of a student whose name has been disclosed or a school official or school administrative unit in which the student attends school.
In a public hearing on the 6th, Commissioner Gendron stated that without collecting that information, it would put federal funding at risk, including the IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education) Act. Curious about this specific assertion, I decided to look up exactly what was supposed to be reported.
(b) Data collection. (1) Each State must collect valid and reliable information as needed to report annually to the Secretary on the indicators established by the Secretary for the State performance plans.
(2) If the Secretary permits States to collect data on specific indicators through State monitoring or sampling, and the State collects the data through State monitoring or sampling, the State must collect data on those indicators for each LEA at least once during the period of the State performance plan.
(3) Nothing in Part B of the Act shall be construed to authorize the development of a nationwide database of personally identifiable information on individuals involved in studies or other collections of data under Part B of the Act.
Later on, it states:
(3) Privacy. The State must not report to the public or the Secretary any information on performance that would result in the disclosure of personally identifiable information about individual children, or where the available data are insufficient to yield statistically reliable information.
The law that establishes the reporting requirements for IDEA is 20 U.S.C. 1418(a)(1)(A), if you want to look up the details.
But this is getting too specific. In any case, I agree that the state has no need to track PII - if each school district has its own system of identifiers, which they can connect to the students if needed to verify their reports, that's good enough: the state has no need of it for these purposes.
]]>As stated in the bill, its purposes are:
Statement of Purposes- The purposes of this Act include the following:
(1) To preserve and create jobs and promote economic recovery.
(2) To assist those most impacted by the recession.
(3) To provide investments needed to increase economic efficiency by spurring technological advances in science and health.
(4) To invest in transportation, environmental protection, and other infrastructure that will provide long-term economic benefits.
(5) To stabilize State and local government budgets, in order to minimize and avoid reductions in essential services and counterproductive state and local tax increases.
Some amounts I ran into as I went along:
I'll read some more later and update this post.
]]>...When the Federal Government contracts for goods or services, it has a proprietary interest in ensuring that those contracts will be performed by contractors whose work will not be interrupted by labor unrest. The attainment of industrial peace is most easily achieved and workers' productivity is enhanced when workers are well informed of their rights under Federal labor laws, including the National Labor Relations Act (Act), 29 U.S.C. 151 et seq. As the Act recognizes, "encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining and . . . protecting the exercise by workers of full freedom of association, self organization, and designation of representatives of their own choosing, for the purpose of negotiating the terms and conditions of their employment or other mutual aid or protection" will "eliminate the causes of certain substantial obstructions to the free flow of commerce" and "mitigate and eliminate these obstructions when they have occurred."
...all Government contracting departments and agencies shall, to the extent consistent with law, include the following provisions in every Government contract:
1) ...the contractor agrees to post a notice, of such size and in such form, and containing such content as the Secretary of Labor shall prescribe, in conspicuous places in and about its plants and offices where employees covered by the National Labor Relations Act engage in activities relating to the performance of the contract...
2) The contractor will comply with all provisions of the Secretary's Notice, and related rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary of Labor.
3) In the event that the contractor does not comply with any of the requirements set forth in paragraphs (1) or (2) above, this contract may be cancelled, terminated, or suspended in whole or in part, and the contractor may be declared ineligible for further Government contracts....
4) The contractor will include the provisions of paragraphs (1) through (3) above in every subcontract entered into in connection with this contract...
...Within 120 days of the effective date of this order, the Secretary shall initiate a rulemaking to prescribe the size, form, and content of the notice to be posted by a contractor...
...If the Secretary finds that the application of any of the requirements of this order would not serve the purposes of this order or would impair the ability of the Government to procure goods or services on an economical and efficient basis, the Secretary may exempt a contracting department or agency or group of departments or agencies from the requirements of any or all of the provisions of this order...
The Secretary may investigate any Government contractor, subcontractor, or vendor to determine whether the contractual provisions required by section 2 of this order have been violated....
The Secretary shall receive and investigate complaints by employees of a Government contractor or subcontractor, where such complaints allege a failure to perform or a violation of the contractual provisions required by section 2 of this order...
The Secretary...may hold such hearings, public or private, regarding compliance with this order as the Secretary may deem advisable.
...the Secretary may...direct that department or agency to cancel...any contract...for failure of the contractor to comply with the contractual provisions required by...this order...
...[the Secretary may] provide that one or more contracting departments or agencies shall refrain from entering into further contracts...with any noncomplying contractor, until such contractor has satisfied the Secretary that such contractor has complied with and will carry out the provisions of this order....
...[the Secretary may] publish...the names of contractors that have, in the judgment of the Secretary, failed to comply with the provisions of this order....
Executive Order 13201 of February 17, 2001, is revoked.
Economy in Government Contracting
...To promote economy and efficiency in Government contracting, certain costs that are not directly related to the contractors' provision of goods and services to the Government shall be unallowable for payment, thereby directly reducing Government expenditures. This order is also consistent with the policy of the United States to remain impartial concerning any labor-management dispute involving Government contractors....
...contracting departments and agencies...shall treat as unallowable the costs of any activities undertaken to persuade employees...to exercise...the right to organize and bargain collectively through representatives of the employees' own choosing. Such unallowable costs shall be excluded from any billing, claim, proposal, or disbursement applicable to any such Federal Government contract.
...agencies shall treat as allowable costs incurred in maintaining satisfactory relations between the contractor and its employees, including costs of labor-management committees, employee publications..., and other related activities.
...This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
Nondisplacement of Qualified Workers Under Service Contracts
...The Federal Government's procurement interests in economy and efficiency are served when the successor contractor hires the predecessor's employees. A carryover work force reduces disruption to the delivery of services during the period of transition between contractors and provides the Federal Government the benefits of an experienced and trained work force that is familiar with the Federal Government's personnel, facilities, and requirements.
Therefore, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act, 40 U.S.C. 101 et seq....
...service contracts and solicitations for such contracts shall include a clause that requires the contractor, and its subcontractors, under a contract that succeeds a contract for performance of the same or similar services at the same location, to offer those employees...employed under the predecessor contract...a right of first refusal of employment under the contract in positions for which they are qualified. There shall be no employment openings under the contract until such right of first refusal has been provided.
..."Service contract" or "contract" means any contract or subcontract for services entered into by the Federal Governmentor its contractors that is covered by the Service Contract Act of 1965, as amended, 41 U.S.C. 351 et seq....
(To be expanded later -- lots of legal cites in this section)
Executive Order 13204 of February 17, 2001 is revoked.
]]>
Every appointee ... shall sign ... the following pledge:
]]>
Every appointee ... shall sign ... the following pledge:
"I will not accept gifts from registered lobbyists .... I will not for a period of 2 years from the date of my appointment participate in any particular matter involving specific parties that is directly and substantially related to my former employer or former clients .... I also agree, upon leaving Government service, not to lobby any covered executive branch official or non career Senior Executive Service appointee for the remainder of the Administration."
The Director of the Office of Management and Budget ... may grant to any current or former appointee a written waiver of any restrictions contained in the pledge signed by such appointee if ... the Director ... certifies in writing (i) that the literal application of the restriction is inconsistent with the purposes of the restriction, or (ii) that it is in the public interest to grant the waiver.
Upon receipt of a claim of executive privilege by a living former President, the Archivist shall consult with the Attorney General (through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel), the Counsel to the President, and such other executive agencies as the Archivist deems appropriate concerning the Archivist's determination as to whether to honor the former President's claim of privilege or instead to disclose the Presidential records notwithstanding the claim of privilege....
Executive Order 13233 of November 1, 2001, is revoked.
Executive Order 13440 of July 20, 2007, is revoked. All executive directives, orders, and regulations inconsistent with this order, including but not limited to those issued to or by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) from September 11, 2001, to January 20, 2009, concerning detention or the interrogation of detained individuals, are revoked to the extent of their inconsistency with this order....
Consistent with the requirements of the Federal torture statute, 18 U.S.C. 2340 2340A, section 1003 of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, 42 U.S.C. 2000dd
, the Convention Against Torture, Common Article 3, and other laws regulating the treatment and interrogation of individuals detained in any armed conflict, such persons shall in all circumstances be treated humanely and shall not be subjected to violence to life and person (including murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment, and torture), nor to outrages upon personal dignity (including humiliating and degrading treatment), whenever such individuals are in the custody or under the effective control of an officer, employee, or other agent of the United States Government or detained within a facility owned, operated, or controlled by a department or agency of the United States.... Effective immediately, an individual in the custody or under the effective control of an officer, employee, or other agent of the United States Government, or detained within a facility owned, operated, or controlled by a department or agency of the United States, in any armed conflict, shall not be subjected to any interrogation technique or approach, or any treatment related to interrogation, that is not authorized by and listed in Army Field Manual 2 22.3....
...officers, employees, and other agents of the United States Government may, in conducting interrogations, act in reliance upon Army Field Manual 2 22.3, but may not, in conducting interrogations, rely upon any interpretation of the law governing interrogation -- including interpretations of Federal criminal laws, the Convention Against Torture, Common Article 3, Army Field Manual 2 22.3, and its predecessor document, Army Field Manual 34 52 issued by the Department of Justice between September 11, 2001, and January 20, 2009....
The CIA shall close as expeditiously as possible any detention facilities that it currently operates and shall not operate any such detention facility in the future....
All departments and agencies of the Federal Government shall provide the International Committee of the Red Cross with notification of, and timely access to, any individual detained in any armed conflict in the custody ... of the United States Government....
There shall be established a Special Task Force on Detainee Disposition (Special Task Force) to identify lawful options for the disposition of individuals captured or apprehended in connection with armed conflicts and counterterrorism operations....
The mission of the Special Task Force shall be to conduct a comprehensive review of the lawful options available to the Federal Government with respect to the apprehension, detention, trial, transfer, release, or other disposition of individuals captured or apprehended in connection with armed conflicts and counterterrorism operations, and to identify such options as are consistent with the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States and the interests of justice....
The Special Task Force shall provide a report to the President, through the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs and the Counsel to the President, on the matters set forth in subsection (d) within 180 days of the date of this order....
]]>Over the past 7 years, approximately 800 individuals whom the Department of Defense has ever determined to be, or treated as, enemy combatants have been detained at Guantánamo. The Federal Government has moved more than 500 such detainees from Guantánamo, either by returning them to their home country or by releasing or transferring them to a third country. The Department of Defense has determined that a number of the individuals currently detained at Guantánamo are eligible for such transfer or release.
Some individuals currently detained at Guantánamo have been there for more than 6 years, and most have been detained for at least 4 years. In view of the significant concerns raised by these detentions, both within the United States and internationally, prompt and appropriate disposition of the individuals currently detained at Guantánamo and closure of the facilities in which they are detained would further the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States and the interests of justice. Merely closing the facilities without promptly determining the appropriate disposition of the individuals detained would not adequately serve those interests. To the extent practicable, the prompt and appropriate disposition of the individuals detained at Guantánamo should precede the closure of the detention facilities at Guantánamo.
The individuals currently detained at Guantánamo have the constitutional privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. Most of those individuals have filed petitions for a writ of habeas corpus in Federal court challenging the lawfulness of their detention.
It is in the interests of the United States that the executive branch undertake a prompt and thorough review of the factual and legal bases for the continued detention of all individuals currently held at Guantánamo, and of whether their continued detention is in the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States and in the interests of justice....
The detention facilities at Guantánamo for individuals covered by this order shall be closed as soon as practicable, and no later than 1 year from the date of this order. If any individuals covered by this order remain in detention at Guantánamo at the time of closure of those detention facilities, they shall be returned to their home country, released, transferred to a third country, or transferred to another United States detention facility in a manner consistent with law and the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States....
No individual currently detained at Guantánamo shall be held in the custody or under the effective control of any officer, employee, or other agent of the United States Government, or at a facility owned, operated, or controlled by a department or agency of the United States, except in conformity with all applicable laws governing the conditions of such confinement, including Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. The Secretary of Defense shall immediately undertake a review of the conditions of detention at Guantánamo to ensure full compliance with this directive. Such review shall be completed within 30 days and any necessary corrections shall be implemented immediately thereafter.
The Secretary of Defense shall immediately take steps sufficient to ensure that during the pendency of the Review described in section 4 of this order, no charges are sworn, or referred to a military commission under the Military Commissions Act of 2006 and the Rules for Military Commissions, and that all proceedings of such military commissions to which charges have been referred but in which no judgment has been rendered, and all proceedings pending in the United States Court of Military Commission Review, are halted.
I would not take this thing, if it lay by the highway. Not were Minas Tirith falling in ruin and I alone could save her, so, using the weapon for her good and my glory. No, I do not wish for such triumphs, Frodo son of Drogo. ... For myself...I would see the White Tree in flower again in the courts of the kings, and the Silver Crown return, and Minas Tirith in peace: Minas Anor again as of old, full of light, high and fair, beautiful as a queen among other queens: not a mistress of many slave, nay, not even a kind mistress of wiling slaves. War must be, while we defend our lives against a destroyer who would devour all; but I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend: the city of the Men of Numenor; and I would have her loved for her memory, her ancientry, her beauty, and her present wisdom. Not feared, save as men may fear the dignity of a man, old and wise...
The parallels to our current situation are striking. Thanks to That Which They Defend @ Daily Kos for the reminder.
]]>Mere days from assuming the presidency and closing the door on eight years of Bill Clinton, president-elect George W. Bush assured the nation in a televised address Tuesday that "our long national nightmare of peace and prosperity is finally over."
]]>
]]>Mere days from assuming the presidency and closing the door on eight years of Bill Clinton, president-elect George W. Bush assured the nation in a televised address Tuesday that "our long national nightmare of peace and prosperity is finally over."
"My fellow Americans," Bush said, "at long last, we have reached the end of the dark period in American history that will come to be known as the Clinton Era, eight long years characterized by unprecedented economic expansion, a sharp decrease in crime, and sustained peace overseas. The time has come to put all of that behind us."
Bush swore to do "everything in [his] power" to undo the damage wrought by Clinton's two terms in office, including selling off the national parks to developers, going into massive debt to develop expensive and impractical weapons technologies, and passing sweeping budget cuts that drive the mentally ill out of hospitals and onto the street.
During the 40-minute speech, Bush also promised to bring an end to the severe war drought that plagued the nation under Clinton, assuring citizens that the U.S. will engage in at least one Gulf War-level armed conflict in the next four years....