The Bridge

Senior U.S. Official’: McCain’s Plan To Kick Russia Out Of The G8 Is ‘Impossible’ And ‘Just A Dumb Thing’

In his March 26 speech on foreign policy, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) laid out what Newsweek’s Fareed Zakaria calls “the most radical idea put forward by a major candidate for the presidency in 25 years.” McCain, seeking to make “his most comprehensive statement” yet on foreign policy, declared that Russia should be kicked out of the G8, of which it has been a member since 1997:

We should start by ensuring that the G-8, the group of eight highly industrialized states, becomes again a club of leading market democracies: it should include Brazil and India but exclude Russia. Rather than tolerate Russia’s nuclear blackmail or cyber attacks, Western nations should make clear that the solidarity of NATO, from the Baltic to the Black Sea, is indivisible and that the organization’s doors remain open to all democracies committed to the defense of freedom.

In his column, Zakaria writes that McCain’s radical idea “lacks any strategic framework” because “we need Russian cooperation” in order to address the “most important security problem[s] that the United States faces,” which is “securing loose nuclear materials” and stopping proliferation by rogue regimes. Now, according to McClatchy, it also appears that it is “impossible“:

The Group of Eight, or G-8, as it’s popularly known, makes decisions by consensus, so no single nation can kick out another. Most experts say the six other countries — Great Britain, France, Italy, Germany, Japan and Canada — would never agree to toss Russia, given their close economic ties to their neighbor. A senior U.S. official who deals with Russia policy said that even Moscow would have to approve of its own ouster, given how the G-8 works.

”It’s not even a theoretical discussion. It’s an impossible discussion,” said the senior official, who requested anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to speak publicly. “It’s just a dumb thing.”

McCain’s plan to boot Russia from the G8 isn’t the first idea proposed in the March 26 speech that has been shot down by reality. In the speech, McCain also spoke of creating a “League of Democracies” to “advance our values and defend our shared interests.”

But, as the Los Angeles Times recently reported, McCain is already backing away from that idea because it was “greeted with alarm by some Republican supporters and wariness by important U.S. allies.”

--Think Progress; courtesy of Frank Leidermann, Acting Editor

Bruce Lunsford on Retirement Security

With health care and other costs of living on the rise, Kentucky’s seniors need a guarantee that their Social Security, savings, and pensions will be 100% secure. George W. Bush and Mitch McConnell have already tried to privatize Social Security, endangering that vital, guaranteed benefit to our seniors. As your Senator, I will oppose all attempts to privatize Social Security, fight to guarantee that corporations make good on their pension promises to workers, and push to lower prescription drug prices.

Don’t Gamble With Our Future

Social Security is a public trust and we must not break that trust. Mitch McConnell is a strong supporter of George W. Bush’s plan to privatize Social Security and reduce the guaranteed benefits paid to Kentucky seniors. McConnell supported diverting guaranteed funding for Social Security into risky private accounts, further depleting a shrinking Social Security trust fund that, according to a recent report, will be exhausted by the year 2041. Mitch McConnell and his friends in Washington want to roll the dice with your guaranteed benefits, but the risk is too great. Social Security should not be privatized.

Protect Pensions from Corporate Greed and Mismanagement

We need to protect pensions for American workers. To do so we must change the bankruptcy laws, putting workers’ retirement accounts ahead of protecting lender’s profits. We must require more transparency in pension investments and make sure that companies place a higher priority at meeting pension obligations than on issuing large executive bonuses.

Make Medicare and the Prescription Drug Benefit Work for Seniors, Not Drug Companies

Kentucky’s seniors deserve access to quality, affordable medical care. When George W. Bush, Mitch McConnell, and the big drug company lobbyists worked together to change Medicare in 2003, they included billions of dollars in loopholes that benefitted the drug companies. Of course, Mitch McConnell is the beneficiary of campaign contributions from the pharmaceutical industry, which may explain why he is putting the drug companies ahead of the public. Mitch McConnell and the Bush Administration’s inaction on ensuring the solvency of the Medicare system have led to the near depletion of resources in the Medicare trust fund. A recent study by the Social Security and Medicare trustees predicts that the Medicare trust fund, used to pay for hospital care, will run out of money by the year 2019. We can’t let that happen. We must fight to change the Medicare system and close the loopholes that prevent Medicare from using its negotiating power to purchase drugs at a lower cost and prohibit the re-importation of safe prescription drugs from Canada. Kentucky’s seniors should not have to pay exorbitantly high prices for their prescription drugs.

-Bruce Lunsford, Democrat for U.S. Senator

--Bruce Lunsford for U.S. Senate Campaign; courtesy of Frank Leidermann, Acting Editor

A Global Environment Organization

By Edward Gresser and Jan Mazurek, The Democratic Leadership Council:

Al Gore’s Nobel Peace Prize award last year gave new energy to climate-change diplomacy. In the award’s wake, our next president has a unique chance to meet the world’s single biggest environmental challenge with a landmark agreement that commits the United States to re-join international efforts to cut gases that are causing the planet to warm. But such an agreement won’t be enough, because the world’s environmental institutions are too weak and too fragmented to enforce it. He or she should therefore accompany climate change policy with institutional reform: specifically, creation of a Global Environmental Organization, or “GEO.”

Even setting climate change aside, the need for a GEO is clear. Environmental policy is the orphan child of international law and institutions. Those interested in preserving the environment are far less able to make policy work than their cousins in trade, finance, labor and security.

For an illustrative comparison, look at trade policy. The world’s most important trade negotiations, agreements, and enforcement are centered in a single institution, the World Trade Organization (WTO). Based in Geneva, the WTO not only is the venue for the major contemporary trade negotiation - the Doha Round - but oversees 20 existing multilateral trade agreements on topics including services, and farm subsidies, tariffs, information technology and intellectual property. It has a single head, Director-General Pascal Lamy, whose background is as a leading French politician and European Union Commissioner. Its mandatory membership dues make the organization’s staff independent from the control of its powerful members. And each of the WTO’s 152 members has an Ambassador permanently stationed at the organization, who serves as a single point-person for trade negotiations and enforcement. The whole membership reviews each country’s compliance with the full array of agreements once every three years - and when this oversight falls short, WTO members settle their differences through an average of 10 dispute settlement cases every month.

The institutions created for finance, labor, and security over the course of the 20^th century are similar. The United Nations and its Security Council handle peace and security, in extreme cases through resolutions backed by military force. The World Bank and International Monetary Fund have overseen finance and development since 1945, with advice backed by real money. The 90-year-old International Labor Organization sets out core labor standards binding on all the world’s businesses, unions, and governments. Each of these organizations has its own central headquarters, a chief officer with a staff funded by mandatory dues, and procedures for enforcing the rules. They all have weaknesses, of course. Some reflect the natural differences of interest among countries and the complexity of the world’s security and economic challenges. Others reflect differences of design, with the WTO probably given the most efficient means of arbitrating disputes. But even so, they unite sophisticated negotiating procedures and enforcement on everything from radio frequency allocation to peacekeeping in Haiti to child labor policy - and just as important, serve as a gateway for the flow of information on their issue to the world’s governments and public.

Environmental institutions and policy are a stark and sad contrast.

The lead international environmental body is the U.N. Environmental Programme (UNEP), an arm of the United Nations located in Nairobi. Tellingly labeled a “Programme” rather than an “organization,” it is run by a U.N. Undersecretary - that is, a second-tier official - rather than by an independent leader. Its funding comes from voluntary contributions rather than mandatory dues, and it is separated from the technical-aid organization known as the Global Environmental Facility.

Environmental agreements, as a result, are unsystematic and poorly enforced. They are scattered around the world, with the agreement on desertification headquartered in Germany, the Persistent Organic Pollutants agreement in Stockholm, chlorofluorocarbon control in Quebec, and Antarctic protection in Tasmania. Each has its own Secretariat, whose enforcement and oversight procedures operate independently of the rest. Countries participating in the agreements are free to sign some and ignore others. Neither governments nor interested citizens have an easy way to assess their obligations or their partners’ compliance.

It should be no surprise that international environmental protection often fails. The 1986 International Tropical Timber Agreement, whose 35 staffers at the Yokohoma headquarters are supposed to monitor and enforce limits on 21 million cubic meters worth of trade in tropical logs and timber, has been powerless to prevent the loss of more than a tenth of the world’s tropical forested land since its signature. The effort to protect sea turtles is a different illustration of the environmental system’s inadequacy - one showing its gaps rather than a simple failure of enforcement. Governments have used the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species to protect turtles from the relatively small threat of international trade in canned soup and turtle-shell jewelry, but have done nothing about the far greater threat of destruction of nesting beaches. Therefore the turtle population continues to decline.

Weak and uneven environmental institutions also increase economic costs to regulated companies and to regulatory agencies, as the U.S. history of environmental law illustrates. The current US system of law arose in large part from industry demands for a more level playing field. The 50 separate sets of state policy that prevailed up until the late 1960s made compliance costly and uncertain for companies and created strong incentives for some states with weaker laws to serve as pollution havens. In response, Congress during the 1960s created the federal system of air, water, and waste laws in place today - much as the creation of the WTO in the 1990s unified a disparate group of tariff agreements, subsidy and anti-dumping codes, and intellectual property rules. For challenges that are global in scope such as climate change, GEO’s economic and environmental imperative is obvious.

And the weaknesses of today’s environmental system will be vastly magnified in the event of a successful climate-change treaty. These issues are complicated by nature. A climate-change agreement will require vastly complex obligations and monitoring mechanisms. Spanning many countries and thousands of industries, it will require sophisticated enforcement tools that could sink the agreement in the absence of a clear, unbiased monitoring organization, as individual countries each seek to judge and enforce the compliance of all the rest. Even with the world’s good will and enthusiasm behind it, such an agreement could easily fail.

The time has therefore come for something simpler, stronger, and better. Put simply, global environmental policy needs institutions as strong and sophisticated as those we have for other topics. The environment needs a single organization, with mandatory dues and an independent chief of recognized international stature. It should take control of the existing welter of agreements, and serve as the main venue for enforcing them, fixing their weaknesses, and negotiating new ones. We suggest “Global Environmental Organization,” with the easy and appropriate acronym GEO.

The case for GEO is fundamentally simple. Global environmental protection means at least as much to the world’s present and future as trade, finance, labor, and security. Therefore we should take global environmental policy and institutions as seriously as we take these others. The time to start is now. And the individual most well-suited to serve as its first leader is none other than our Nobel laureate, Vice President Gore.

---

Article printed from Ideas Primary: http://www.ideasprimary.com

URL to article: http://www.ideasprimary.com/?p=495

--Democratic Leadership Council; courtesy of Frank Leidermann, Acting Editor

 

Senator Denise Harper Angel: 2008 Kentucky Legislative Session Recap

Now that the 2008 session has come to an end, I wanted to update you on the work the Kentucky Legislature has done over the past several months.

Our most important duty is passing a state budget and the one we approved places a strong emphasis on investing in Kentucky's future, particularly our young people.   

We also invested in the basics -- economic development, water and sewer lines, and public safety.

Besides the budget, I feel that several of the new laws we passed will improve the quality of life in the Commonwealth.

Below you will find a brief summary of the budget and several other successful bills I supported:

ü   Budget

Through the $19 billion state budget, we managed to restore a significant amount of the Governor's proposed cuts to higher education.

We placed money in the budget for improvements around the booming Fort Knox area to help the growth there, and we made plans to build a new mental health facility, Eastern State Hospital, and improvements around the Kentucky Horse Park as it prepares for the world spotlight, Alltech FEI World Equestrian Games 2010.

ü   Booster Seats

Senate Bill 120 will require young children who are too big for infant car seats to be placed in booster seats when riding in vehicles.  The bill states that children under 7 years old and between 40-50 inches tall must use the booster.

ü   Bullying

House Bill 91 will require the state Department of Education to craft discipline guidelines.  The bill will also require local school authorities to alert law enforcement when school harassment involves a potential felony.  Yearly reports on school harassment will be made to the Department of Education and the Legislature.

ü   Adventure Tourism

Senate Bill 196 will boost the state's adventure tourism industry by allowing the state to enter into agreements with private property owners to use their land for recreational activities.  The agreements would allow property owners to permit public use of the land without fear of the liability issues they otherwise would face.

ü   Alcohol vaporizers

HB 202 will ban the sale, purchase or use of alcohol vaporizing devices, which can be used to inhale intoxicating fumes of alcohol.

ü   Math and science incentives

SB 2 will offer incentives to increase the number of students taking advanced math and science courses in Kentucky.  Incentives would be provided from a science and mathematics advancement fund aimed at improving students' math and science knowledge from elementary school through college.

ü   Cancer

SB 98 will provide Medicaid coverage for breast and cervical cancer treatments for uninsured women.  SB 96 will require insurers to cover colorectal cancer screenings, in accordance with guidelines of the American Cancer Society.

ü   Golden Alert

SB 125, which I sponsored, creates a Kentucky Golden Alert for impaired adults who are missing.  The bill directs the Kentucky Division of Emergency Management to issue the Golden Alert through local media outlets whenever an impaired adult 18 years of age or older is reported missing from home, a facility or the care of another person.

ü   Energy consumption

HB 2 creates incentives for homeowners to use solar and wind energy, and to use other energy-efficient lights, windows, and insulation.  The bill also requires state government and local schools to build and lease energy-efficient buildings, and establishes a low-interest loan program to help businesses and public agencies become more energy efficient.

ü   Amusement park safety

SB 203 will require more frequent inspections of amusement park rides and prevent anyone under 18 from operating the rides.

ü   Penal Code

Senate Joint Resolution 80 calls for a legislative subcommittee to undertake a review of the state penal code.  The legislation would require the Legislature's Judiciary Committee to appoint a Penal Code Study Subcommittee, upon approval of General Assembly leadership.  The subcommittee would be responsible for thoroughly reviewing the state's penal code and finding ways to redraft and modernize it.

ü   Sex offenders

HB 211 will broaden Kentucky's child sex abuse laws while increasing penalties for abusers and those who fail to report abuse.  The bill will include older children under state laws that protect minors from first-degree sexual abuse by raising the age of children covered by the law from 12 to 16, or 16 to 18, if the perpetrator is in a position of trust or authority.

ü   E-waste

Senate Joint Resolution 76, which I sponsored, directs the Environmental and Public Protection Cabinet to make recommendations for an electronic waste disposal and recycling system.

ü   Elections

HB 370 will erase the requirement that runoff elections be held in gubernatorial primary races if no candidate receives at least 40 percent of the vote.

ü   Merit scholarships

SB 75 will allow students with 2.5 GPAs who are on track to graduate from college to keep their full KEES scholarship money each semester.  Currently, students with GPAs above 2.5 but below 3.0 only receive half their award.

ü   Military

HB 168 will allow active duty military serving outside the state up to 90 days to renew their driver's licenses after returning to Kentucky.  They could not be cited for driving without a license during that period.

Most of these bills and the others approved by the Kentucky General Assembly will take effect mid-July.

The Legislature will return to the Capitol January 6, 2009 for our "short" 30-day session.  I look forward to continuing our dialogue in the weeks ahead.  Thank you for your input and advice.  As always, you are welcome to contact me anytime.

Denise Harper Angel

State Senator

--Kentucky Senate Democratic Caucus; courtesy of Frank Leidermann, Acting Editor

CBS News Reports Clinton Would Beat McCain By Nine Points

CBS TV News is reported the Associated Press Poll that shows Clinton would beat McCain by 50% to 41% while showing Obama beating McCain by just two points, 46% to 44%.

-CBS TV News; courtesy of Frank Leidermann, Acting Editor

Survey USA Poll: Clinton Still Leads In Indiana

No Clear Trend in Indiana -- Clinton Ends April Just As She Started: In a Democratic Primary in Indiana today, 04/28/08, 8 days until votes are counted, Hillary Clinton finishes ahead of Barack Obama, according to a SurveyUSA poll conducted for WHAS-TV in Louisville and WCPO-TV in Cincinnati. The results are identical to a SurveyUSA TV poll released 4 weeks ago, on 04/01/08. Clinton led then 52% to 43%, leads now 52% to 43%. Other polls show the contest closer; some polls show Obama ahead. SurveyUSA tracking graphs show movement toward Clinton in the middle of April but offsetting movement to Obama at the end of April. This back-and-forth can be seen clearly on the interactive tracking graphs for males, for Democrats, for pro-choice voters, and for residents of greater Indianapolis. Clinton's advantage is steady among women, steady among voters age 50+, and steady in Southern Indiana, which borders Kentucky. Obama is gaining ground among voters under 50, where he leads for the first time; among liberals, where he leads for the first time; in Northern Indiana, where he is tied for the first time; and in Central Indiana, where he has cut Clinton's lead in half. Clinton, by contrast, is making steady inroads among Independent voters.

--Survey USA; courtesy of Frank Leidermann, Acting Editor

Hillary Clinton: Economic Leadership = Jobs, Jobs, Jobs

Hillary Clinton's economic leadership has been key to her victories in Ohio and Pennsylvania and will be the focus of her campaign in the run-up to the Indiana and North Carolina primaries.

As today's New York Times reports, Senator Clinton is demonstrating her leadership on core economic issues by laying out the boldest and most specific plan to help create jobs of any candidate in this race -- and she is the only candidate with comprehensive proposals to reduce our dependence on foreign fuels in the long run and provide relief for consumers in the short term.

Today, she will unveil a plan to suspend the gas tax paid for out of oil company profits in order to give drivers price relief during the upcoming peak driving months of summer. Unlike Senator McCain, Senator Clinton's plan is paid for and will not raid the highway trust fund. Senator Clinton also has the most detailed, comprehensive trade agenda to ensure that trade is not a race to the bottom and has a bold housing agenda that would freeze foreclosures and create a moratorium on subprime resets. And she would take away $55 billion in special interest tax breaks and put that money back in the pockets of middle class Americans.

While Senator Obama retools his stump speech to reach middle and working class voters, Senator Clinton is going to continue doing what she has successfully done in Ohio and Pennsylvania -- reach out to those Americans who work hard for a living and need a champion in the White House to help them in this difficult economy.

In Pennsylvania, 55% of voters identified the economy as their number one issue -- Senator Clinton won that group 59-41. In Ohio, 40% of voters said the economy was poor -- Senator Clinton won that group by 16 points. Senator Clinton's specific economic plans -- on green collar jobs, on tax relief, on reducing fuel costs for consumers and taking on the oil industry -- has clearly resonated with the voters most concerned about the state of the economy.

By contrast, Senator Obama continues to perform poorly with blue collar voters, raising serious concerns about his ability to successfully compete in key industrial swing states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan. He does do well with those voters who say the economy is good (7% of the electorate in Pennsylvania) or those who are not at all worried about the state of the economy (12% in Texas), but as the economy worsens that group will likely continue to diminish.

Indeed, it is the leadership that Senator Clinton demonstrates on this critical issue that accounts in part for her consistent success in winning over those voters who decided in the last 3 days of the campaign (18 point margins with those voters in both Pennsylvania and Texas). As voters consider the serious challenges facing the nation and the next President in the closing days of these contests, they are choosing the candidate they believe can best be the steward of our economy in rocky times.

As this campaign continues, Senator Clinton will continue to stress the economy in her stump speech and will make clear that, unlike Senator Obama, she knows consumers need relief from gas taxes and deserve a President who has consistently been willing to take on big oil as opposed to awarding it billions in giveaways -- as Senator Obama did when he voted for the Bush-Cheney energy bill.

--Hillary Clinton for President Campaign; courtesy of Frank Leidermann, Acting Editor

TEXT OF MIKE CASSARO'S ANNOUNCEMENT ON WBKI TV: NATIONAL LOTTERY AND MORE

(For more on this interview go to WBKI’s website: http://www.cwlouisville.com)

I want to chat with you today about an important but neglected issue in this year’s election cycle. This issue is shoring up Social Security and Medicare funding.  The survival of many Kentuckians is literally dependent upon these programs.

As we all know, Social Security and Medicare are under siege. Our population is aging.

As it ages, the demand for Social Security and Medicare benefits increases significantly.

A significant chunk of our earnings already goes to fund these programs. To prevent further strains on our earnings, we need alternative sources of revenue to make Social Security and Medicare financially secure.

Two years ago, the Bush administration, with the blessings of Mitch McConnell and Anne Northup, tried to privatize Social Security. The American public said a loud NO to this proposal.  I agree with the American public. The Bush, McConnell and Northup proposal would have helped Wall Street without helping main street America.

I believe that a national lottery will generate the needed revenues without raising our taxes and privatizing a public trust.   Many other countries, including Mexico and Canada, have national lotteries. Why not us? 

Let me say again, I am proposing legislation for a national lottery to help shore up the Social Security and Medicare trust funds.  This lottery will have a distinct identity and separate process from already existing state lotteries. 

I realize that as a freshmen senator, the chances of getting this legislation through Congress will be very difficult. I love difficult challenges, especially those that benefit society.

Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to make this announcement.  Feel free to ask me any questions about this proposal or my candidacy for U.S. Senate. 

What My Campaign Is About?

My campaign is not about me. I have a successful career, a great family, and a great life. 

If I wanted to do what was best for me, I would continue along my current path.

Unfortunately, many Kentuckians are struggling financially. They are doing without basic health care coverage. Their children cannot afford to further their education. This campaign is about them.  I believe that it is morally just to do what I can to improve the lives of Kentuckians.

-Mike Cassaro, Democrat for U.S. Senator

--Cassaro for U.S. Senator Campaign; courtesy of Frank Leidermann, Acting Editor 

Real Clear Politics Election 2008

REAL CLEAR POLITICS ELECTION 2008
Democrats	Obama-Clinton	Spread
Total Delegates	1727 - 1592	Obama + 135
Pledged Delegates	1489 - 1333	Obama + 156
Popular Vote	49.2 - 47.5	Obama +1.7
Popular Vote (w/FL)	48.3 - 47.6	Obama +0.7
Nat'l RCP Average	48.8 - 42.2	Obama +6.6
North Carolina	51.3 - 35.8	Obama +15.5
Indiana	46.3 - 43.3	Obama +3.0
General Election	McCain-Obama	McCain-Clinton
National	Obama +2.0	Clinton +1.2
Pennsylvania	Tie	Clinton +5.2
Ohio	McCain +2.6	Clinton +5.0
Florida	McCain +11.7	McCain +0.3
Wisconsin	Obama +2.3	McCain +5.0

--Real Clear Politics; courtesy of Frank Leidermann, Acting Editor

Bruce Lunsford on Health Care

It is completely unacceptable that here in the United States 47 million Americans, including 9 million children and 500,000 Kentuckians, have no health insurance. We owe it to ourselves and future generations to ensure that all Americans have access to affordable, quality health care. If other nations can do it, so can we. One of the big reasons why Washington fails to provide universal health care is that politicians like Mitch McConnell get gold-plated, first-class health insurance paid for by you and me. It’s no wonder McConnell doesn’t feel any urgency to reform our health care system.

A Voice for Change

Mitch McConnell and his Republican colleagues in the Senate have stood in the way of universal health care for years. It’s time Kentucky had a senator who will champion this issue and work hard to provide quality, affordable health care to all Kentuckians.

Starting our Children on the Path to Good Health

Every child deserves access to health care. Mitch McConnell has repeatedly opposed efforts to expand health care to 3.8 million of the nation’s uninsured children. We must work to expand SCHIP (State Children’s Health Insurance Program) to cover all children. This is not only morally right, but economically sensible, as it allows health problems to be addressed at an early stage, eliminating the need for costly, last-minute intervention. We can also help the next generation live longer, healthier lives by encouraging better diets in school cafeterias and by teaching our kids how to take care of their bodies.

Putting an End to McConnell’s Obstructionism

From SCHIP expansion to veterans’ health care benefits, many good proposals to improve health care for Kentuckians have already been debated in the Senate. Unfortunately, Mitch McConnell has been the chief obstructionist in the Senate, stopping meaningful changes to our health care system.  He has chosen to side with the pharmaceutical companies and other special interests rather than support working families and children. Enough is enough. Kentucky deserves a Senator who will bring change to Washington.

-Bruce Lunsford, Democrat for U.S. Senator

--Lunsford for U.S. Senate Campaign; courtesy of Frank Leidermann, Acting Editor