Headstrong America

More Pharmeceutical Cronyism

2006-03-06T05:45:00.000-06:00

Ever get the feeling that the pharmaceutical industry is just not exerting enough control over the United States government and world affairs? Well, have no fear, because Resident Bush has nominated Wall Street Transcript's 1995 Pharmaceutical Industry CEO of the Year, Randall L. Tobias, to run USAID, the United States Agency for International Development.

One of USAID's jobs is to distribute drugs to developing countries, and to improve "the availability and use of quality health commodities, such as pharmaceuticals, vaccines, medical supplies, and basic equipment..."

The Senate will Tuesday morning at 09:30. Set your TIVO to CSPAN-2 to check it out.

I think I'll buy some shares of Eli Lilly today, we'll see if it skyrockets like Haliburton did.

Bush Poll Numbers Drop Like Rock

2006-02-28T21:25:00.000-06:00

Is America waking up? Could be. From a CBS News Poll released on 27 Feb. 06:

PRES. BUSH JOB APPROVALS
Now 1/2006 10/2005 11/2004
Overall 34% 42% 35% 51%
Iraq 30% 37% 32% 40%
Economy 32% 39% 34% 42%
Energy 27% -- -- --

Other juicy tidbits include:

"the previous low of 35% came last October, one month after Hurricane Katrina, shortly after the withdrawal of Harriet Miers from a Supreme Court nomination and just after U.S. deaths in Iraq reached the 2,000 mark."
"Not since November 2004 has a majority approved of the President’s overall performance."
"for the President’s handling of the Iraq war have also plummeted, to their all-time low of 30%. And approval of his handling of the economy is also down."

Good read, everybody should check it out. And hey, don't be surprised if Cheney "accidentally" shoots him tomorrow. You read it here first.

What Issues are Most Important to You?

2006-02-25T16:29:00.000-06:00

I need some help on a project I'm working on.

The goal is this: prepare one or two ranked-choice polls to rate how strongly progressives feel about a number of the Republican antics of the last five years. After the polls are up, we'll circulate the URLS to a few of the bigger lefty sites & mailing lists to see if we can get a couple of thousand responses.

The payoff would be twofold: we'd get information on what already sells (for election strategy, etc...), and what issues need to be pounded on to increase public awareness.

I'm having three problems:

1) Everybody has their blind spots. I'm sure I've missed huge issues,
2) The wording for the individual issues is going to be uneven, and
3) There's a technical limitation of at most 18 choices per poll.

I think the right approach to (3) is to break the issues down into two polls: foreign policy and domestic policy.

Any feedback on (1) and (2) would be much appreciated.

(A couple of good sources are http://www.thousandreasons.org/reasons.php, http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=64326 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W_Bush )

In no particular order, here's my rough draft of the issue list:

1. Failure to Build Real Iraq Coalition
2. Misleading America about Iraq War Rationale
3. Financial Waste/No-bid Haliburton Contracts in Iraq
4. USA-PATRIOT Act
5. Bush Wiretapping U.S. Citizens
6. Election Fraud/Diebold Machines Stealing Votes
7. Appointing Sam Alito to Supreme Court
8. Prisoner Abuse/Secret Prisons/Rendering Prisoners
9. Cheney/Libby Leaking CIA Agent Valerie Plame's Name
10. Jack Abramoff/Tom DeLay Scandals
11. Opposing Creation of Independent 9/11 Commission
12. Hurricane Katrina Preparedness/Response
13. Bush Creates "Office of Global Communications"/Propaganda Mill
14. Medicare Act of 2003: Attack on Seniors
15. Administration Opposition to Stem Cell Research
16. Sustained Attack on Contraceptive Use/Family Planning/Abortion
17. Bush Stance Against Affirmative Action
18. Bush Stance Against Gay Marriage
19. UAE To Run 21 U.S. Ports
20. 3 Million U.S. Jobs Exported Overseas/CAFTA/WTO/NAFTA
21. Overtime Protection removed in 2004 Omnibus Spending Bill
22. Record Trade Defecits
23. Bush Favoring Intelligent Design over Evolution
24. Bush Creation of Office of Faith Based Initiatives
25. Terry Schiavo Affair
26. Underfunding "No Child Left Behind Act"
27. Support for School Vouchers is An Attack on The Poor
28. Tax Cuts for the Wealthy
29. Record Budget Defecits
30. Proposed ANWR Oil Drilling/National Forest Sell-off
31. Global Warming/Refusing the Kyoto Protocol
32. Failure to Act on Peak Oil
33. $40B cuts on 89 Social Programs in 2006 Budget
34. Failure to Act on Bird Flu
35. Failure to Establish a Reasonable Minimum Wage (Living Wage)
36. Corporate Welfare/Multi-Billion Dollar Tax Loopholes for U.S. Companies
37. Obstructing National Single-Payer Health Care Proposals

If you want to comment, you can do so here, at progressivesonline.com or at democrats.com

2006 Primaries: Essential Information

2006-02-22T20:26:00.000-06:00

Just a quickie: the 2006 primaries are quickly approaching! Some more quickly than others. These links provide the information you need to know:

The state-by-state primary schedule: http://www.fvap.gov/pubs/electcal.html

State-by-state rules for how long you have to be registered before participating in a primary: http://www.eac.gov/register_vote_deadlines.asp

Stop Bush's Plan to Let the United Arab Emirates Operate U.S. Ports

2006-02-21T10:48:00.000-06:00

From this morning's Democrats.com dispatch:

George Bush wants to let Dubai World Ports - a company owned by the government of the United Arab Emirates - take control of 6 of the largest ports in the U.S.: New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia. Shipping ports are already the most vulnerable part of our Homeland Security, since 95% of imported goods come by ship. Yet only 5% of cargo containers - which could easily hide WMD's - are physically inspected. And the United Arab Emirates has some of the most dangerous ties to terrorism.

Click here to tell your Senators and Representatives to stop Bush's insane plan.

Feingold vs. Gore: Big Differences

2006-02-15T04:48:00.000-06:00

This is the third post in a series of ideological comparisons (using analysis from http://www.ontheissues.org) between Russ Feingold and other 2008 Democratic hopefuls. Today, we'll look at differences between Feingold and Al Gore.

Al Gore has said time and again that he has no intention of running in 2008. Nonetheless, there is a significant movement amongst the NetRoots to urge him to run. I applaud the determination and passion of this movement. I also enthusiastically concur that he was elected President in 2000 by both the Electoral College and the popular vote, but that this victory was stolen by a conservative, activist Supreme Court. I've signed all the petitions and sent all the e-mails.

But, there is a but. And that is this: I have some serious ideological differences with President Gore. Based on those differences, he is not my pick for 2008. These differences hinge on three things: free trade, separation of Church and State, and his approach to law enforcement.

Russ Feingold is not, by any means, the only 2008 hopeful that shares my views on these topics. Wes Clark is dead on as well. Even the much maligned DLC sweethearts like Hillary Clinton and John Kerry toe the party line on these important issues.

	Feingold	Gore
Overall Rating	Populist-Leaning Liberal	Moderate Populist
Permit Prayer in Public Schools	Strongly Opposes	Favors
Death Penalty	Strongly Opposes	Favors
Mandatory Three Strikes Laws	Strongly Opposes	Strongly Favors
Support and Expand Free Trade	Strongly Opposes	Favors
Link Human Rights to Trade With China	Strongly Favors	Strongly Opposes
Allow Churches to Provide Welfare Services	No Opinion	Strongly Favors

I want to restate that these ideogy models are obviously simple pictures of a complex reality, but I've found them quite telling and a good starting point for deeper debate.

One need only look at this page to see that I'm not a disintrested observer on this question. However, the only bias I can imagine that I put into this table is the choice of issues to show. If you feel the comparison isn't fair, I encourage reasonable responses.

The sources for this table are http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Russell_Feingold.htm and http://www.ontheissues.org/Al_Gore.htm.

Feingold vs. Bayh: Big Differences

2006-02-14T05:21:00.000-06:00

Since yesterday's post comparing Russ Feingold to Mark Warner was so well received, I'm going to run with the idea and do comparisons featuring Russ versus various contenders from the far right wing of the party.

Today, we'll look at Evan Bayh. I want to restate that these ideogy models are obviously a simple pictures of a complex reality, but I found them quite telling and a good starting point for deeper debate.

Here are the differences that I found most interesting:

	Feingold	Bayh
Overall Rating	Populist-Leaning Liberal	Moderate Liberal Populist
Abortion is a Woman's Right	Strongly Favors	No Opinion
Privatize Social Security	Strongly Opposes	No Opinion
Death Penalty	Strongly Opposes	Strongly Favors
Mandatory Three Strikes Laws	Strongly Opposes	No Opinion
Support and Expand Free Trade	Strongly Opposes	Strongly Favors
Link Human Rights to Trade With China	Strongly Favors	Strongly Opposes
Allow Churches to Provide Welfare Services	No Opinion	Favors

One need only look at this page to see that I'm not a disintrested observer on this question. However, the only bias I can imagine that I put into this table is the choice of issues to show. If you feel the comparison isn't fair, I encourage reasonable responses.

The sources for this table are http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Russell_Feingold.htm and http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Evan_Bayh.htm.

Added 3:20 PM: Bayh got a 56% rating from ACLU in the 108th Congress. Feingold scored 89%. The ACLU Scorecard is here.

Feingold and Warner: Big Differences

2006-02-13T05:32:00.000-06:00

Out of curiosity, I went to ontheissues.org and compared Russ Feingold's ideology to Mark Warner's. These ideogy models are obviously a simple pictures of a complex reality, but I found them quite telling and a good starting point for deeper debate.

Here are the differences that I found most interesting:

	Feingold	Warner
Overall Rating	Populist-Leaning Liberal	Moderate Populist Conservative
Death Penalty	Strongly Opposes	Favors
Mandatory Three Strikes Laws	Strongly Opposes	Strongly Favors
Absolute Right to Gun Ownership	Strongly Opposes	Strongly Favors
Decrease Overall Taxation of the Wealthy	Strongly Opposes	Strongly Favors
Support and Expand Free Trade	Strongly Opposes	Strongly Favors
Seek UN Approval for Military Action	Favors	Opposes
Drug Use is Immoral: Enforce Laws Against It	Strongly Opposes	Strongly Favors
Allow Churches to Provide Welfare Services	No Opinion	Favors

Help Set Election Reform Priorities at MoveOn.org

2006-02-07T14:27:00.000-06:00

Take the survey here: here.

Here are the questions:

1. Expand same-day voter registration and early, absentee, or weekend voting
2. Re-enfranchise ex-felons who have served their time
3. Demand voting rights for residents of the District of Columbia
4. Require electronic voting machines to print voter-verified paper records
5. Set clear, consistent rules for counting provisional ballots
6. Replace the Electoral College with direct popular election of the president
7. Strengthen campaign finance reform to limit big donations and clean up corruption
8. Eliminate the third-party "spoiler" effect with instant runoff voting
9. Reduce long lines at polling stations
10. Represent minority views by replacing winner-take-all elections with proportional representation
11. Other (write-in).

My write-in was: "Instant Runoff Voting in Democratic Party Primaries!"

Progressives Online Election Reform Discussion.

Sign Feingold's Petition on Bush's Illegal Wiretapping

2006-02-06T11:22:00.000-06:00

Dear Headstrong America,

Today the Senate Judiciary Committee will be holding hearings on President Bush's domestic spying program - a government program that illegally wiretaps the phones and emails of American citizens without a warrant. Please sign my petition today to help me hold President Bush accountable for this outrageous power grab.

Click here to sign my petition.

When Attorney General Alberto Gonzales appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee during his nomination hearing last year, I asked him directly about the legality of just such a program. Gonzales dismissed my question as a "hypothetical situation." We now know that not only was such a program already in existence, but as a key advisor to the President, Gonzales had full knowledge of the domestic spying program.

Today, while I'm holding Gonzales accountable for his misleading answers last year, I need you to help me hold President Bush accountable for his actions in authorizing this illegal spying program. A week ago, in his State of the Union address, President Bush made no apologies for this illegal program. We need to show him that the American people will not stand by as he authorizes the government to invade the privacy of law-abiding Americans by bypassing the laws of this country.

Click here to sign my petition to hold President Bush accountable for his actions. Our goal is to collect petitions from ten thousand Americans, letting the President know that they are outraged at his actions and his lack of candor. We can vigorously fight terror without sacrificing our rights and freedoms.

Sincerely,

Russ Feingold
United States Senator
Honorary Chair, Progressive Patriots Fund

Join the POL Wiretapping Discussion

Feingold Kicks Ass in Online Polls

2006-02-04T22:41:00.000-06:00

The MyDD Feburary Straw Poll is well underway, with around 2,600 ballots cast. The current final four are:

Russ Feingold	1,005	(40.2%)
Wesley Clark	805	(32.2%)
Mark Warner	412	(16.5%)
John Edwards	278	(11.1%)

In the final round, with votes redistributed, the current results are:

Russ Feingold	1,325	(54.4%)
Wesley Clark 1,109 (45.6%)

You can cast your ballot here and read Chris's analysis here.

I found this bit particularly interesting:

Since November, as of this writing, there have been 9,994 votes in MyDD straw polls. In all four polls, Clark and Feingold have been the two candidates in the final round. Feingold has received 4,914 votes, or 49.2%, and Clark has received 4,471 votes, or 44.7%.

MyDD flipped from Clark/Feingold to Feingold/Clark in December. The Daily Kos Straw Poll did the same flip in Janurary when Clark dropped 4K votes and Feingold picked up 11K.

Check out the 2008 Candidates Discussion at progressivesonline.

Open Letter: Thanks A Million, Russ

2006-01-24T20:10:00.000-06:00

Dear Senator Feingold,

With a tear in my eye, I thank you from the bottom of my heart for the service you rendered America today vis-a-vis the Alito nomination. You keep pulling off these ninth-inning clutch grand slams that give us hope. A hope that our seriously wounded system still has a breath of life. This is a passion that the DLC fails to inspire. One wonders sometimes if they even believe such civic passion still exists.

It's hard to judge soberly if the victory today was merely symbolic. The important progress on the Hill last month suggests this is a winnable battle. But even if it turns out to be a symbolic victory, a moral victory, it remains an important victory.

I've made myself very familiar with your philosophies on Supreme Court nominees over the past three months. I know that I agonized ( http://headstrong-america.blogspot.com/2006/01/feingold-alito-and-next-week.html ) about which way you'd go on this issue. I fully appreciate that you've probably lost some sleep on it as well.

It was the right thing to do for America.

But, at risk of bringing vulgar politics into the mix, it was the right thing to do for your Presidential campaign next year. This was the one issue imaginable that could have pole-axed your budding candidacy in the progressive blogosphere. Though distasteful, it's easy to explain away Roberts. Alito would have been tough. I'm sure such concerns were coincidental to your decision, but would like to express a hearty "whew!" from the Left.

I'm sure you've heard the term "Deaniacs." I just Googled "Feinatic," and got zero hits. Unless a less goofy alternative emerges, I suspect that this, my friend, is about to change.

Thanks for all you do.

Support Hillary? Read Molly.

2006-01-23T02:27:00.001-06:00

Molly Ivins took a nice shot from the left at Hillary (not to mention Steny Hoyer, Rahm Emmanuel, Joe Biden and Joe Lieberman) a couple of days ago. It's a tricky article to quote from, but here's the bit that pops the hardest:

What kind of courage does it take, for mercy's sake? The majority of the American people (55 percent) think the war in Iraq is a mistake and that we should get out. The majority (65 percent) of the American people want single-payer health care and are willing to pay more taxes to get it. The majority (86 percent) of the American people favor raising the minimum wage. The majority of the American people (60 percent) favor repealing Bush's tax cuts, or at least those that go only to the rich. The majority (66 percent) wants to reduce the deficit not by cutting domestic spending, but by reducing Pentagon spending or raising taxes.

The majority (77 percent) thinks we should do "whatever it takes" to protect the environment. The majority (87 percent) thinks big oil companies are gouging consumers and would support a windfall profits tax. That is the center, you fools. WHO ARE YOU AFRAID OF?

Read the whole thing at CNN.

Senator Burns, your lie is open.

2006-01-21T01:00:00.000-06:00

"Burns, your lie is open."

Sign MoveOn Petition for Wiretapping Special Prosecutor

2006-01-20T11:36:00.000-06:00

Dear MoveOn member,

As you probably saw in the news this morning, the Bush administration is facing growing backlash from across the political spectrum on its secret, allegedly illegal wiretapping program. Even conservative leaders like Grover Norquist are calling for investigations.1 Yesterday, the administration released yet another legal defense—but many of the arguments were already debunked by the non-partisan Congressional Research Service.2

Breaking the law to spy on American citizens is a very serious abuse of power, but many members of Congress think people will let it slide. So we're launching a petition that asks for a special prosecutor—like Patrick Fitzgerald—to find out the facts, and asks Congress to hold a real investigation into what happened. We're also asking for protection for whistleblowers who come forward with evidence of wrongdoing.

Can you help us reach 250,000 signers before we deliver it at the Congressional hearings on President Bush's wiretaps in early February? Just go to:

http://political.moveon.org/ruleoflaw

On Monday, former Vice President Al Gore gave a speech about the program, where he said: "What we do know about this pervasive wiretapping virtually compels the conclusion that the president of the United States has been breaking the law, repeatedly and persistently."
We seldom send you speeches to read or watch, but this address is very important. It's powerful, inspiring, and "reality-based." At a time when politicians talk about balancing freedom and safety, Gore makes the case that open democracy and freedom are essential for security.

You can watch, listen to, or read the speech here: http://www.libertyspeeches.org

President Bush has admitted that he personally authorized thousands of apparently illegal wiretaps,3 and he doesn't plan to stop4. In his address Al Gore asked, "If the president has the power to eavesdrop on American citizens without a warrant, imprison citizens on his own declaration, kidnap and torture, then what can't he do?"

Both Republicans and Democrats in Congress are outraged. Even the non-partisan Congressional Research Service released a report indicating that the White House program "conflicts with existing law."5 Republican Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter said he plans to look at the program closely at hearings in Congress next month. 6

The Bush administration is in deep trouble on this—and they know it. As former Republican Congressman Bob Barr recently pointed out, the president had full Constitutional authority to legally spy on terrorists. We need to know why he chose to go around it.7

The more pressure we can add, the less Congress and the White House will be able to sweep this problem under the rug. Can you take a moment to sign our petition calling for a special prosecutor now?

http://political.moveon.org/ruleoflaw

No one disagrees that our government must be able to track terrorists. But as Sandra Day O'Connor recently wrote, "It is during our most challenging and uncertain moments . . . that we must preserve our commitment at home to the principles for which we fight abroad."8

Thanks for all you do,

–Eli, Nita, Wes, Jennifer and the MoveOn.org Political Action Team Friday, January 20th, 2006

Online Chat with DCCC on Republican Corruption Today

2006-01-20T03:33:00.000-06:00

Dear Friend,

On Wednesday Democrats unveiled our Honest Leadership and Open Government Act, real reform on ethics and lobbying in Washington that will dismantle the Republican money machine that has taken over our government.

Our bill would put an outright end to gifts from lobbyists, close the revolving door where representatives immediately jump to lucrative lobbying careers, clamp down on companies like Halliburton who cheat the taxpayer, and shut down efforts like the "K Street Project," which Republicans created to tell corporations and lobbying firms whom they should hire in exchange for political access.

Democrats have unified behind these principles in a powerful show of force and conscience, from Democratic mayors of small towns to Democratic Leaders in the US House and Senate. Every major Democratic Committee has come out together in support, and we still need you behind us. I hope you'll sign the Honest Leadership Pledge.

I also hope that you'll join me tomorrow for an online chat about this, the culture of corruption, hot races emerging across the country and whatever else is on your mind. I've enjoyed these chats more and more with each one. If you haven't taken part in one before, there's no better time than right now, and if you have rest assured I'll try to address those questions and concerns that I couldn't get to in the past.

The chat will take place on Friday morning (tomorrow) at 10:00 AM Eastern (7:00 AM Pacific), but you can start submitting questions now - hope to see you there:

Online Chat with John Lapp, DCCC Executive Director

Time: Friday, January 20, 2006 -- 10:00 AM Eastern
Web Address: http://dccc.org/blog_chat

Hope to see you there, and don't forget to sign on to the Honest Leadership Pledge!

Sincerely,

John Lapp
Executive Director, DCCC

Help Russ Feingold investigate government wiretapping

2006-01-19T15:22:00.000-06:00

Dear Haus,

A few weeks ago, the President confirmed news reports that he directed the National Security Agency to wiretap the phones of American citizens without court permission as required by law. When I stood up against the PATRIOT Act, it was because I feared that the government would use the few questionable provisions to harm our rights and freedoms. Now, in light of the disclosure of the government's warrantless wiretapping, I am more resolved than ever to keep the PATRIOT Act from being reauthorized without fixing these same broken provisions. In addition to fixing the PATRIOT Act, however, we also need to hold this administration accountable for these apparently illegal wiretaps, and to discover the facts about how President Bush justifies taking these drastic actions in violation of existing law. That's why I need your help calling for a full, unfettered investigation of the administration's wiretapping of American citizens:

http://www.progressivepatriotsfund.com/wiretapping

I want to be clear here: we should do all we can to keep our country safe from terrorists, whether they're in the United States or outside our borders. But these wiretaps are being conducted without any meaningful court oversight, apparently in violation of the law. And we need to learn what the Bush administration knew, and when they knew it. Please sign my petition, urging an investigation into this program:

http://www.progressivepatriotsfund.com/wiretapping

Just as I fought to protect our rights and freedoms when I felt that parts of the USA PATRIOT Act endangered them, I also pledge to take a leading role in investigating these illegal wiretaps. You helped keep the PATRIOT Act from being reauthorized, and now I need your help again to protect our civil liberties.

Sincerely,

Russ Feingold
United States Senator
Honorary Chair, Progressive Patriots Fund

p.s. Please sign the petition today, and ask your friends to do the same!

Howard Dean: Government for Sale

2006-01-18T21:14:00.000-06:00

Dear [Haus],

Many Americans sense that our government has been bought and paid for by powerful interests with deep pockets. They sense that our government's priorities are being dictated by something other than the public interest.

They are right.

Republican leaders in Washington have deliberately and shamelessly built a money-for-influence machine unlike anything our democracy has ever endured. Many Democrats have spoken out about this Republican culture of corruption over the past months and years. But today our party takes a giant step forward -- with a single voice, we demand sweeping reform.
Right now in Washington our leaders in the House and Senate are unveiling the Honest Leadership & Open Government Act -- a set of specific reforms that will completely change business as usual in Washington. Democrats in the House and Senate are united behind this legislation, which aims to fulfill a specific promise: to return power to the American people.
Change in Washington requires more than the support of Democrats in Congress or Republicans scrambling to save face. Making real change will require an outpouring of support for that change by ordinary Americans. Democrats across the country and in the halls of Congress must speak with a single voice.

Please join the demand for honest leadership on this historic day:

http://www.democrats.org/honesty

It's not just Washington that needs a change.

I am writing to you from Ohio, where this morning I stood with Democratic state legislators demanding the same honesty and accountability in a state where Republican officials have defrauded the public and infected everything from the budget to the voting process with cronyism and corruption.

Our work together building the Democratic Party in all 50 states will ensure that we have a potent, organized political force making the case for clean government everywhere.
The first step is to get everyone you know who is ready to say, "enough is enough" on board. Sign on to the demand for honest leadership and get the message out in your community:

http://www.democrats.org/honesty

This fight will not end today, and this demand will not go away. Every single Democrat in Congress will be pressing for this reform legislation, and everyone from governors to mayors to challengers running against incumbent Republicans will be carrying the banner of change.
Today Democrats across the country are united on the way forward. But as we head into this election year, there is one thing you should remember.

This legislation won't change anything for those elected leaders who have already demonstrated that they will break the law in their quest for money and power. One Republican leader has already pleaded guilty to bribery, another has been indicted for money laundering, and still more are under investigation.

We need a higher standard for all of our elected leaders. But when it comes to Republicans who have already broken the law, we need to clean house.

Let's do it together.
Governor Howard Dean, M.D.

A special message from John Edwards...

2006-01-18T01:09:00.000-06:00

Dear Friend,

Please join me in calling on Democratic Senators to stand up for the core principles of our party by opposing Samuel Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court. His record, both on the bench and as an official in the Reagan and first Bush administrations, shows that he is an ideologue whose extreme views would put our fundamental rights at risk. This is not my petition; it is ours, because all of us are threatened by this nomination. Sign our petition calling on Senate Democrats to stand together and block Alito's confirmation with every means at their disposal. We will share the results with key Senate Democrats.

http://www.oneamericacommittee.com/oppose_alito

What would it mean if Alito is confirmed to the Supreme Court? Alito is a conservative activist in the mold of Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. If he replaces the moderate Sandra Day O'Connor, a consistent swing vote, the court would shift far to the right, endangering our liberties so deeply that it would affect the lives of every single American.

Here are just a few of the positions Alito has staked out that put our fundamental rights in danger.

Abuse of Power. President Bush is now engaging in surveillance of United States citizens that violates federal law. He could have asked Congress to change the law, but he didn't. That overt abuse of power demonstrates the importance of a Supreme Court committed to protecting our basic freedoms. But Alito has consistently expressed support for vesting tremendous power in the hands of the President, with few checks by Congress and the courts. In questioning, he responded that the courts were ill-equipped to determine the limits for interrogations or detentions that the administration or the military deems important for security or to balance the government's needs against basic constitutional protections. The implication that he would take a hands off approach whenever the administration says "national security" is in invitation for governmental abuse.

Eliminating the Right To Choose. When Alito applied to work at the Justice Department in 1985, he expressed his strong belief that, in his own words, "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion." As a judge, he took a narrow view of Roe that the Supreme Court, and Justice O'Connor, explicitly rejected. In his hearing, Democratic Senators repeatedly pressed Alito to distance himself from the view he expressed in 1985. He didn't. Instead he focused on the undisputed doctrine of stare decisis, that is, giving weight to existing case law. In the absence of a repudiation of his unequivocal statement in 1985, I am not comforted much. His answers about abortion sounded a lot like Clarence Thomas's. It's clear that given the opportunity, Alito will vote to restrict - and probably eliminate - a woman's right to choose.

Conservative Judicial Activism. Judge Alito has a history of putting his conservative ideology over the rule of law. He has voted to invalidate important laws passed by Congress, including a ban on machine guns and the Family and Medical Leave Act. And he has consistently ruled against victims of discrimination in the workplace. In all these cases, he has proven more conservative than many of his Republican colleagues on the courts of appeals and even more conservative than Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas in some cases.

Judge Alito has consistently sided with the most powerful interests, business or government, which concerns me greatly. But I am most concerned about his willingness to overlook executive abuse of power, which has been the hallmark of this administration. This is a judge who is way out of the mainstream, someone who disregards our fundamental rights and endangers our liberties. Join me today in urging Senate Democrats to stand together and use every means they have available to block this dangerous nomination.

http://www.oneamericacommittee.com/oppose_alito

Sign this important petition today. Your support will make an enormous difference to our Democratic Senators as they stand together to fight Samuel Alito's confirmation to the Supreme Court.

Thank you for all that you do for our party,
John Edwards

POL Discussion...

ACLU v. NSA Lawsuit Seeks End to Bush's Illegal Spying

2006-01-18T01:03:00.000-06:00

Dear [Haus],

For over eighty-five years the ACLU and its members have been there to stand up for freedom when our leaders disregard and defy the Constitution.

We follow in that tradition today with the filing of ACLU v. NSA, a lawsuit seeking an end to the secret program of illegal electronic surveillance, authorized by President Bush.

Our lawsuit claims that this spying program violates Americans' rights to free speech and privacy under the First and Fourth Amendments of the Constitution and that the president has exceeded the limits of executive authority under separation of powers principles.

The suit was filed in federal district court in Michigan, on behalf of several prominent journalists, scholars, attorneys, and national nonprofit organizations (including the ACLU) who frequently communicate by phone and email with people in the Middle East.

Though our president claims he can authorize warrantless spying on Americans, this surveillance program is illegal. The ACLU has launched an intensive effort to put an end to the program and restore lawfulness to government and law enforcement activities.

In addition to the ACLU v. NSA lawsuit, we've launched a multi-channel ad campaign, a widespread call for congressional hearings, and are urging the appointment of a special counsel who can independently investigate the actions of this administration and prosecute any and all crimes committed.

In the coming days, watch for news about our suit and other continuing efforts. Partisans in Washington have already been scrambling to undermine inquiries into the NSA scandal, but this lawsuit is grounded in our most basic American principles, and not driven by the tides of politics or spin.

Please continue to stand with us. Look for our advertisements in print and on the Web. Join our call for a special counsel and urge your friends to do the same. Your support has been, and will continue to be, fundamental to our success.

I'm never more proud to lead the ACLU than on days like today when we take the bold steps needed to preserve fundamental Constitutional principles. Through our actions, we will see that justice prevails.

Sincerely,
Anthony D. Romero
Executive Director

POL Discussion...

Zogby Poll: 53% of Americans, 76% of Democrats Support Impeachment

2006-01-18T01:00:00.000-06:00

Zogby Int'l has concluded it's fourth round of polling for afterdowningstreet.org. Here are the top two items:

Among American adults, 53% agreed and 42% disagreed with the statement:"If President Bush did not tell the truth about his reasons for going to war with Iraq, Congress should consider holding him accountable through impeachment."Among Democrats 76% agreed, and 22% disagreed.Oct. 29 – Nov. 2, 2005, Zogby International poll, commissioned by AfterDowningStreet.org, +/- 2.9% margin of error.

Among American adults 52% agreed and 43% disagreed with the statement:"If President Bush wiretapped American citizens without the approval of a judge, do you agree or disagree that Congress should consider holding him accountable through impeachment."Among Democrats 71% agreed, and 24% disagreed.January 9-12, 2006, Zogby International poll, commissioned by AfterDowningStreet.org, +/- 2.9% margin of error.

Summary at http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/downloads/pollingonepage.pdf
More at http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/polling
Discuss at http://www.progressivesonline.com/showthread.php?p=4246&posted=1#post4246

MoveOn Quickly Surpasses Alito Goals

2006-01-11T04:45:00.000-06:00

MoveOn.org surpassed its initial goal of raising $250,000 for anti-Alito ads in 23 hours, raising almost $11,000 per hour, or $181 per minute.

Dear MoveOn Member,
This afternoon, the nation's attention will turn to the Senate hearings on Samuel Alito, President Bush's nominee to the Supreme Court. The public reaction to these hearings will likely determine whether Alito is ultimately confirmed or rejected by the Senate.

We've produced a humorous TV ad that highlights Alito's strategy of hiding his extreme views on issues like privacy, Presidential power and corporate abuse from Congress and the Public. The ad shows Alito being prepped in the dressing room for his television debut, reviewing his various cover stories—stories he will likely repeat many times this week.

We think the ad could really help reporters and the public zero in on Alito's deception and encourage senators to stand up for the truth. We're aiming to raise $250,000 today so we can run it all week on CNN during their coverage of the hearing itself.

Can you pitch in?

https://political.moveon.org/donate/alito.html
You check out the full script of the ad at the end of this note.

Americans count on the Supreme Court to serve as a check against abuses of power by the government or corporations. But Bush and his far-right base have the opposite vision. They want a Court that gives the President unchecked power (to tap our phones at will, for example) but renders Congress powerless to protect us from things like corporate polluters, discrimination, or unsafe conditions at work.

Samuel Alito's nomination is Bush's attempt to impose this radical ideology on the rest of us for decades to come. Here are just a few of the ways Alito's extreme views would threaten individual rights:

Privacy
Alito advocated for complete government immunity for illegal wiretapping.1
In a 2004 case, Alito tried to authorize the strip search of a mother and her 10 year old daughter, without a warrant and in their own home. He was overruled by his fellow judges.2
Alito has written that one of the "legal positions in which I personally believe very strongly" is that "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion""—flatly contradicting Roe v. Wade.3

Civil rights

In 1974, Edward Garner, an unarmed 15-year-old African-American 8th grader, was shot dead in the back by the police in Memphis, TN while fleeing from a $10 robbery. Alito agreed with the shooting and when the law that had permitted it was ruled unconstitutional, he argued that the Reagan administration should join the appeal. Reagan rejected the advice.4
After Knight Ridder newspapers reviewed all 311 of Alito's published decisions, they noted that he almost never sided with an employee in a case about discrimination on the basis of race, gender or disability. In many cases, Alito attempted to set a standard that would prevent most discrimination cases from even getting to trial.5

Worker's rights

Alito ruled that Congress did not have the authority to guarantee state workers the right to care for loved ones in medical emergencies—gutting the Family and Medical Leave Act. The Supreme Court overturned his ruling.6
Alito argued that Congress did not have the authority to regulate the sale and possession of machine guns—he was overruled by his fellow judges. The logic he used in his dissent would threaten Congress's ability to enact almost all worker protections, environmental protections, and civil rights laws.7
Since being nominated, Alito has repeatedly deceived Congress and the nation to hide his extreme views on privacy, civil rights, and his own lapses in judicial ethics. We must not let Alito or his handlers spin their way past the Senate and onto the high Court.
With your help, we'll be able to air our new ad during this make-or-break week, and continue to build opposition through local organizing in key states around the nation.

With Republicans in control of the Senate, this fight began as an uphill battle. But the more Bush's and Alito's agenda becomes clear, the harder it will be to push it through.

https://political.moveon.org/donate/alito.html

Thanks for all that you do,

–Ben, Justin, Joan, Rosalyn and the MoveOn.org Political Action Team
Monday, January 9th, 2006

ACLU: Tell Your Senators Alito is Wrong for America

2006-01-09T16:06:00.000-06:00

The issue of the day:

Tell Your Senators Alito Is the Wrong Justice for Civil Liberties

Dear Friends,

As the Senate begins hearings on the nomination of Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr. to the Supreme Court, the ACLU is taking an extraordinary step.

That is because this is an extraordinary time. Our President has claimed unprecedented executive powers and has shown a deep hostility towards protecting individual liberties and rights.

The ACLU opposes a Supreme Court nominee only when his or her record clearly indicates that the nominee is fundamentally hostile to civil liberties. With that context and standard in mind, we believe there is no choice but to oppose the Alito nomination.

We encourage each and every person in our country who cares about the future of civil liberties to urge their Senators to reject this nomination.

Tell your senators to protect our civil rights and civil liberties by opposing the Alito nomination.

At a time when the President of the United States is defying the Constitution and showing contempt for the checks and balances essential to democracy, the last thing we can tolerate is a Supreme Court nominee who has a broad view of executive power and a limited view of the judicial role in checking that power.

A Supreme Court Justice with Judge Alito’s troubling record on civil liberties issues, including reproductive freedom and civil rights, would be the wrong choice at any point in time.

At this moment in time, a nominee with Judge Alito’s history of deference to authority and support for government power would strike a blow to the future of fundamental freedoms.

In this high-stakes climate, the Supreme Court must be a bulwark against incursions on our fundamental freedoms.

Judge Alito would replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, considered a moderate voice and a critical swing vote on civil liberties and civil rights issues.

For example, in the case of American-born detainee Yaser Esam Hamdi, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said the Court has "made clear that a state of war is not a blank check for the president when it comes to the rights of the nation's citizens." We are deeply concerned that Judge Alito would not bring the same balance and moderation to the Court.

The ACLU and freedom-loving people all across America are fighting to uphold the Constitution and the Bill of Rights against a climate of disregard, and in some cases illegality, in the current administration.

Go to http://action.aclu.org/alito to join the ACLU in urging your senators to reject the Alito nomination.

The ACLU has participated in more cases before the Supreme Court than anyone besides the U.S. government. Our work, including a number of pivotal Supreme Court cases, puts us at the forefront of the battles to preserve civil rights, reproductive freedom, and constitutional checks and balances.

America needs the Supreme Court to defend the Constitution, not help tear down the well-established system of checks and balances that protects us against Presidential abuses of power.

Tell your senators to protect the Constitution and oppose the nomination of Judge Alito or read more.

Sincerely,

Anthony D. Romero
Executive Director
American Civil Liberties Union

Lamont vs. Lieberman in CT

2006-01-08T00:20:00.000-06:00

This was easily the most interesting piece of Democratic Party news in the past couple of days. Liberal businessman Ned Lamont is considering a challenge to (marginally) Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman.

That's not the interesting bit. The interesting bit is this: it's causing a huge ruckus in the progressive blogosphere. Probably no serving Democrat makes the liberal skin crawl as much as Joe Lieberman. This is despite a reasonably liberal voting record.

Two camps are forming: one that wants to put as many Democrats in Congress as possible. The other wants to drag the party to the left by punishing Lieberman for his sins. You can watch the battles here, here, and here.

My take: I'm not going to loose sleep over how this situation resolves. It's a good thing for the party that this is even happening. The party's showing signs of life, and we're light years ahead of where we were a year ago. If I lived in Connecticut, however, I'd probably throw some money Lamont's way. Heck, give it a few days, I might anyway.

(Interesting GoogleFact: Ned Lamont gave $1000 to Lieberman's campaign in 2004.)

Feingold, Alito, and Next Week

2006-01-05T14:43:00.000-06:00

I have a secret: I know what Senator Russ Feingold is going to do with respect to the Samuel Alito confirmation hearings next week. Lean in a little and I'll share it with you. He will:

Evaluate the Nominee Based on His Qualifications, Temperament, Objectivity and Integrity

Most Senators would say this and then make their vote based on polls. Russ won't. He is the current sweetheart of the progressive blogosphere, and we really wish his answer would have been this: "I will oppose Alito's nomination by tooth and by claw." It would make our lives much easier. But it's not his style.

Damn him and his integrity!

So, the whole process decouples, at least for us on the sidelines, into a semantic analysis. I think Feingold will use a very narrow definition of "qualified" when assessing Alito. He will ask himself "Does Alito have the necessary experience and skill as a judge to sit on the court?" Can he read, write, speak, make legal decisions, and button his robe. I also think he will find that Alito is, in this sense, "Qualified."

But this is where it gets juicy.

The issues of "Temperament, Objectivity and Integrity" are left. The American Bar Association gives a definition of "Judicial Temperament" which "...includes common sense, compassion, decisiveness, firmness, humility, open-mindedness, patience, tact and understanding."

And I think these issues, particularly compassion, open-mindedness, and understanding will be the crux of his decision. And I'm pretty sure Russ will make his decision very carefully and very slowly. I really, really hope his final decision is to vote against the confirmation. And I hope this for two reasons. First, because it's the right thing for America. Second, because if he fights hard against this nomination, win or lose, he'll bolster his position in the race for '08. But that fact just won't factor into his decision. His supporters just have to wait nervously, while he does the unimaginable: the right thing.

Russ hasn't ruled out a filibuster against the nomination, but that means exactly what it says. I haven't ruled out Thai for dinner, but I'll end up having a burger.

Feingold's Supreme Court Nomination Forum accepts input from Wisconsinites and non-Wisconsonites alike. If you want to send him your views, go for it.

Tell the FEC To Look Hard at Dastardly Diebold

2006-01-04T05:52:00.000-06:00

This was in a batch of stuff I got from democrats.com this morning. I wanted to get the word out quick before the day gets too hectic.

Demand Strict Inspection of Diebold Software
It has been proven that Diebold electronic voting machines use code that is prohibited by federal law, but that hasn't stopped them from selling their machines and states from using them!

Please let Federal Election Commissioners know that citizens want the FEC to uphold the law and insist Diebold comply. You can use this one link to send an email to all commissioners. Please let them know that we are paying attention!

1,000,000 Signatures Against Alito?

2006-01-04T03:14:00.000-06:00

On Monday, the Senate will reconvene and we hope to deliver to them a petition with 1,000,000 signatures opposing the confirmation of Sam Alito to the Supreme Court. The Bush administration's failure to get Harriet Meyers confirmed gives us hope, as well as their recent losses on the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge and the USA-PATRIOT Act. With the domestic wiretapping scandal and Abramoff turning state's evidence, there's reason to hope republicans in the Senate will be a bit more thoughtful on this issue than they were on "The Bridge to Nowhere."

Anyway, this email from Howard sums the issue up best. I encourage visitors to follow his lead:

We now know that George Bush personally ordered American intelligence services to spy on American citizens without the consent of any court and repeatedly directed officials to take actions that explicitly violated the law. Our courts are the last line of defense against abuses of power like this, and every judicial nominee must demonstrate that they will honor their most important responsibility: protecting our rights and freedoms.

Samuel Alito will not.

During the course of his judicial career, Samuel Alito has compiled a record of looking the other way when abuses of power threaten our basic freedoms. He has deferred to unscrupulous prosecutors who constructed all-white juries to try black defendants. He repeatedly failed to protect our right to privacy. He was even the lone judge voting to uphold the illegal strip-search of a 10-year old girl.

Next week Judge Alito's confirmation hearings will begin. Already over 750,000 people have signed a petition asking Senators to oppose Alito -- today I add my name. Please join me:

http://www.democrats.org/alito

A broad coalition of groups will deliver this petition to Senators in less than 48 hours. You and I have the chance to push the total over a million if we spread the word.

Moderate Republicans who have expressed concern about the domestic spying program also have serious questions about Judge Alito, and an outpouring from ordinary Americans could force them to do the right thing and vote against him.

Even before the domestic spying story broke, Senators in both parties had expressed concern about Judge Alito's credibility. On everything from his ideological streaks to his rulings in cases where he had a clear conflict of interest, Judge Alito seems to be willing to say whatever it takes to get confirmed. After bragging about his membership in an ultra-conservative group on his college campus to boost his right-wing credentials, he's now waffling on exactly what his relationship with the group was. And he explicitly broke a promise he made under oath to the Senate that he would recuse himself from cases where he had a personal financial interest.

Across the country more and more people are realizing that if Judge Alito is confirmed, the impact on our rights and our lives will be felt for generations. Join the drive for a million people calling on the Senate to reject the Alito nomination...

The Senate must reject Samuel Alito.

Thank you.

Governor Howard Dean, M.D.

P.S. -- For more information about Judge Alito's deeply concerning ethical lapses and ideological rulings, see these resources:

http://www.democrats.org/alitoresources

MoveOn ActionForum Frustrations, Solutions

2005-12-30T12:37:00.000-06:00

I like the idea of MoveOn's ActionForum. I try to be active there, but over the years it's become more and more frustrating. The site has suffered from growing pains that can be solved by easy technological changes. There's some evidence that they might address some technological issues in the new year, but in the meantime, a lot of energy is being wasted.

The fundamental problem is this: there are 33,400 posts arranged on 6,680 pages (here's a workaround). There is no way to search for posts on a given subject. There is no way to link to a post. Thus the vast majority of posts get lost in a digital swamp.

It's not uncommon for 50 people to write nearly identical posts and for thousands of people to take the time to vote on them (example). There are two side effects: user frustration with the spam, and dilution of the message we're sending to MoveOn.

Say, for the sake of argument, there was a search function on the site from the beginning. Say (wild guess) the average post is essentially identical to 10 others. Say the search function eliminated all repetition. About 2 person-years of writing would have been freed up to use more effectively. I can't even come up with a way to estimate how many person-years of browsing would have been saved.

There is a primative way to search ActionForum using Google, but it's hamstringed by the fact that a user can't vote on "scores" pages. I haven't seen the underlying PERL code, but I can't imagine it being more than an hour's worth of work to fix that problem.

There are probably (another swag) 10,000 MoveOn members that could write both fixes in under a day. Heck, I'd buy plane tickets, go there, and fix the system for free.

I don't feel that MoveOn is getting the message from their users that ActionForum is broken, and am considering starting a petition. But before I do that, I'd like to open up a discussion here on this issue and see what y'all have to say on the topic. (There is also a poll on this issue at MyDD).

2008 Hopefuls on the Issues

2005-12-28T04:26:00.000-06:00

(A followup post on the Liberal Meter article.)

This whole project should be taken with a grain of salt. Nobody believes hook-line-and-sinker everything they read on the web. Just because something is in chart form, doesn't mean it's absolute truth.

The graph is a simple model of a complex subject, and is meant to encourage thought and inquiry about the ideologies of the 2008 hopefuls. I can't speak to the accuracy of the data at ontheissues.org that I based it on, except to say that it looks reasonable.

Out of the 280 data items I transcribed from their site, one typo has been pointed out already. I fixed that and updated the graph and spreadsheet. I'll gladly fix any other data errors that are pointed out to me.

The graphic to the right is adapted from the spreadsheet and presents visually the candidates response to the issue as transcribed from ontheissues.org.

Bright green indicates "agree strongly." Dark green means "agree." Yellow means "neutral." Dark red means "disagree" and bright red means "disagree strongly." You can click on the image to enlarge it.

If you find the image hard to read, it might be easier to look at it in spreadsheet form.

Graph Rates 2008 Hopefuls on the Issues

2005-12-27T22:19:00.000-06:00

Using data from ontheissues.org, Headstrong America has created a nifty graph rating 2008 presidential hopefuls on their adherence to liberal, progressive values.

The candidates are rated on 20 social and economic issues against ontheissues.org's responses for the "ideal liberal." Russ Feingold and Ralph Nader came closest to the ideal responses.

Tightly clustered towards the liberal end of the spectrum are John Kerry, Hillary Rodham Clinton, John Edwards, and Wes Clark. Another cluster in the center of the spectrum contains Al Gore, Joe Lieberman, Evan Bayh, Mark Warner, and Bill Richardson.

Republicans John McCain and George W. Bush are clustered in the conservative edge of the spectrum as a reference.

The spreadsheet used to generate the graph is available at Headstrong America. The issues on which the candidates were ranked are as follows:

Economic Issues	Social Issues
Require companies to hire more women & minorities	Abortion Is A Woman's Right
More Federal Funding For Health Coverage	Sexual Orientation Protected By Civil Rights Law
Privatize Social Security	Permit prayer in public schools
Reduce use of coal, oil, and nuclear energy	Parents choose schools via vouchers
Decrease overall taxation of the wealthy	Mandatory "Three Strikes" Sentencing Laws
Immigration Helps Our Economy – Encourage It	Absolute right to Gun Ownership
Support and Expand Free Trade	Link Human Rights To Trade With China
More Spending on Armed Forces	Drug Use Is Immoral: Enforce Laws Against It
Reduce spending on missile defense (Star Wars)	Death Penalty
	Allow Churches To Provide Welfare Services
	Seek UN Approval for Military Action

ontheissues.org has a series of ideological matching quizzes which are a hoot to take. See, for example The Political Celebrity Matcher.

Support Russ Feingold's Progressive Agenda for America

2005-12-27T12:34:00.000-06:00

Every once in a while, you get a request for a donation that you just can't say no to. As the coffee brewed this morning, I paced the floor trying to put a monetary value on Russ Feingold's bottom-of-the-ninth heroics this year. After I hit the "Submit" button, I felt I didn't give enough.

It did leave me with a New Year's resolution: to max out my contribution to Feingold's PAC next year with a check for $5,000.

Here's the e-mail. Let your conscience be your guide:

Together we have accomplished a lot in the last year. With your support, we stopped the current, poorly written and dangerous PATRIOT Act from being reauthorized without the necessary changes. Because of you, we were able to support more than 18 Democratic candidates running for office in 2006. Because of you, we were able to accept invitations to travel to Florida, Alabama, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, New Hampshire, California, Illinois, and Minnesota to spread our national progressive reform agenda.

The Progressive Patriots Fund community has a lot to be proud of in our inaugural year and I want to personally thank you for your support.

But now, I need your help to continue our work in 2006. Your contribution today of $100, $50, $25 or whatever you can afford will help us have the resources to spread our message in 2006 and beyond.

http://www.progressivepatriotsfund.com/newyear

While some of the errors of the PATRIOT Act are being successfully challenged for the moment, the recent revelations of unauthorized government spying on American citizens shows us we need to be ever vigilant in defense of our freedoms. With your help I am committed to making sure that we continue the fight against terrorism while we also protect our rights.

I am also committed to continuing to speak out on the need for a flexible target timeframe to bring our troops home from Iraq safely, and return our national security focus to protecting our country from those that attacked us on 9/11.

Please show your support for this agenda by contributing today.

http://www.progressivepatriotsfund.com/newyear

In 2006 we want to continue to promote our progressive reform agenda and support even more strong democratic candidates for office across the country. Our first online "Pick a Progressive Patriot" event was a resounding success, with almost 10,000 of you voting. I hope we'll be able to repeat this event in the next year with candidates running for Governor, Senate, and Congress. We also plan to spread our progressive message to even more states. I'll be traveling to Colorado and speaking at a Democratic Party event this week and will be in Vermont in early January to support Bernie Sanders Senate campaign. I hope to travel to more states throughout the year, but none of this can happen without your continued financial support. Your contribution of $100, $50, $25 or whatever you can afford helps us communicate a progressive message and support great candidates in 2006:

http://www.progressivepatriotsfund.com/newyear

Thank you once again for all your support over the past year. I've resolved to keep fighting for the issues we believe in: protecting our rights and freedoms, bringing our troops home safely, providing affordable health care, and keeping our government honest. I hope you'll resolve to help me keep fighting for the same.

Sincerely,

Russ Feingold
United States Senator
Honorary Chair, Progressive Patriots Fund

p.s. With the fundraising quarter ending December 31st, it's crucial that I receive your contribution as soon as possible!

Authorized and paid for by the Progressive Patriots Fund,
Daniel D. Hannula, Superior, WI, Treasurer

Take MSNBC Poll: Impeach Bush!

2005-12-26T16:39:00.000-06:00

With 158,892 responses, 86% of the respondants to this MSNBC poll support impeaching George W. Bush. That's around 137,000 people. Take the poll yourself at MSNBC. Here are the current results:

Do you believe President Bush's actions justify impeachment?

Yes, between the secret spying, the deceptions leading to war and more, there is plenty to justify putting him on trial. 86%

No, like any president, he has made a few missteps, but nothing approaching "high crimes and misdemeanors." 5%

No, the man has done absolutely nothing wrong. Impeachment would just be a political lynching. 8%

I don't know. 2%

2008 Hopefuls on Election Reform

2005-12-26T12:48:00.000-06:00

Presidential hopefuls currently serving in the United States Senate run the gamut from A to F in Headstrong America's 2005 Senate Election Reform Scorecard.

Senator	State	Score	Grade
Clinton, Hillary	D-NY	96.94	A
Kerry, John	D-MA	88.39	B+
Boxer, Barbara	D-CA	81.6	B-
Bayh, Evan	D-IN	70	C-
Feingold, Russell	D-WI	70	C-
Dodd, Christopher	D-CT	70	C-
Biden, Joseph	D-DE	0	F
Santorum, Rick	R-PA	0	F
Allen, George	R-VA	0	F
Brownback, Sam	R-KS	0	F
Frist, William	R-TN	0	F
Hagel, Chuck	R-NE	0	F
McCain, John	R-AZ	0	F
Dole, Elizabeth	R-NC	0	F

Democratic hopefuls scored a 68% overall, skewed down by Joe Biden's zero score. Removing Biden from the equation gives them a respectable 80%, well above the Democratic Caucus' overall score of 54%.

Republican hopefuls scored a 0%, compared to the Senate Republicans' overall score of 7%. Senator John Ensign (R-NV) tied with Sen. Mark Dayton (D-MN) for 1st place, but neither are known to be entertaining presidential ambitions.

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) took second place overall in the Senate with a 97% for introducing S.450 and cosponsoring S.53. John Kerry (D-MA) tied for 4th place, and Barbara Boxer (D-CA) tied for 5th place.

Former Democratic Senators Tom Daschle and John Edwards suported Verified Voting bills during their Senate tenure.

The scorecard considered support for the following bills:

S.330, the "Voting Integrity and Verification Act of 2005"
S.450, the "Count Every Vote Act of 2005"
S.1130, the "Democracy Day Act of 2005"
S.Con.Res.53, "Reject Photo Identification Requirements for Voting"

For information on the scoring methodology and the legislation used, please see the scorecard

Senate Democrats Lead the Way in Election Reform Issues

2005-12-26T04:29:00.000-06:00

Democratic Senators, as a group, score a 54% overall in Headstrong America's 2005 Senate Election Reform Scorecard. This may sound bad, but compares quite well to the Republicans' overall score of 7%. Several individual Democrats scored very high in the report.

Senator Mark Dayton (D-MN) tied John Ensign (R-NV) with a 100% score for first place as "Senate Election Reformer of the Year." Senator Dayton got six points for cosponsoring Senate Resolution 330, hailed by verifiedvoting.org as "The Gold Standard" of verified voting legislation, as well as Senate Resolution 450, and Senate Con. Res. 53. Senator Dayton's hard work lifted Minnesota to 5th place out of the 50 states, with no help whatsoever from fellow Minnesotan Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN) who earned a zero.

Right behind Senator Dayton, with a 97% is Sen Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY). She earned points for introducing S.450 and cosponsoring S.53. In a three-way tie for third place are Senators Ron Wyden (D-OR), Harry Reid (D-NV), and Dick Durbin (D-IL) each at 93% for cosponsoring S.330 and S.Con.Res. 53.

Ten Senate Democrats scored in the B-range: Frank Lautenberg (NJ), John Kerry (MA), Tim Johnson (SD), Dianne Feinstein (CA), Debbie Ann Stabenow (MI), Bill Nelson (FL), Barbara Mikulski (MD), Patrick Leahy (VT), Barack Obama (IL), and Barbara Boxer (CA).

Fourteen Senate Democrats scored a C-minus for cosponsoring either S.1130 or S.Con.Res.53: Mary Landrieu (LA), Paul Sarbanes (MD), Carl Levin (MI), Joseph Lieberman (CT), Chuck Schumer (NY), Mark Pryor (AR), Daniel Akaka (HI), Kent Salazar (CO), Chris Dodd (CT), Russ Feingold (WI), Tom Harkin (IA), Byron Dorgan (ND), Evan Bayh (IN), Jon Corzine (NJ), and Edward Kennedy (MA).

The following 14 Democrats all scored 0:

Joe Biden	DE	Jack Reed	RI
John Rockefeller	WV	Patty Murray	WA
Max Baucus	MT	Maria Cantwell	WA
Herb Kohl	WI	Blanche Lincoln	AR
Kent Conrad	ND	Dan Inouye	HI
Jeff Bingaman	NM	Robert Byrd	WV
Thomas Carper	DE	Ben Nelson	NE

The lone Independent in the Senate, James Jeffords (I-VT) put both the Democratic and Republican caucuses to shame with a B+.

The scorecard considered support for the following bills:

S.330, the "Voting Integrity and Verification Act of 2005"
S.450, the "Count Every Vote Act of 2005"
S.1130, the "Democracy Day Act of 2005"
S.Con.Res.53, "Reject Photo Identification Requirements for Voting"

For information on the scoring methodology and the legislation used, please see the scorecard

Senate Republicans get one A+, 51 F's in Election Reform

2005-12-26T03:47:00.000-06:00

Republican Senators, as a group, score an abysmal 7% overall score in Headstrong America's 2005 Senate Election Reform Scorecard, but do have some standouts that deserve a hearty pat on the back.

Senator John Ensign (R-NV) tied Mark Dayton (D-MN) with a 100% score for first place as "Senate Election Reformer of the Year." Senator Ensign got six points for introducing Senate Resolution 330, hailed by verifiedvoting.org as "The Gold Standard" of verified voting legislation. The Nevada delegation ranked 1st of all fifty states, with Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) scoring a 93%.

Behind Senator Ensign, Republicans John Sununu (R-NH), Conrad Burns (R-MT), Lincoln Chafee (R-RI) each scored a very respectable 88% for cosponsoring S.330.

The following 51 Republicans all scored 0:

McConnell, Mitch	(KY)	Murkowski, Lisa	(AK)
Roberts, Pat	(KS)	Martinez, Mel	(FL)
Lugar, Richard	(IN)	McCain, John	(AZ)
Inhofe, James	(OK)	Hutchison, Kay Bailey	(TX)
Hatch, Orrin	(UT)	Lott, Trent	(MS)
Kyl, Joh	(AZ)	Isakson, Johnny	(GA)
Warner, John	(VA)	Thomas, Craig	(WY)
Talent, James	(MO)	Stevens, Ted	(AK)
Voinovich, George	(OH)	Vitter, David	(LA)
Thune, John	(SD)	Shelby, Richard	(AL)
Sessions, Jeff	(AL)	Santorum, Rick	(PA)
Specter, Arlen	(PA)	Snowe, Olympia	(ME)
Smith, Gordon	(OR)	Collins, Susan	(ME)
Chambliss, Saxby	(GA)	Burr, Richard	(NC)
Bunning, Jim	(KY)	Coleman, Norm	(MN)
Cochran, Thad	(MS)	Coburn, Tom	(OK)
Allen, George	(VA)	Allard, Wayne	(CO)
Alexander, Lamar	(TN)	Brownback, Sam	(KS)
Bond, Christopher	(MO)	Bennett, Robert	(UT)
Hagel, Chuck	(NE)	Frist, William	(TN)
Enzi, Mike	(WY)	Domenici, Pete	(NM)
Gregg, Judd	(NH)	Grassley, Charles	(IA)
Graham, Lindsey	(SC)	Crapo, Mike	(ID)
Craig, Larry	(ID)	Cornyn, John	(TX)
Dole, Elizabeth	(NC)	DeWine, Mike	(OH)
DeMint, Jim	(SC)

The scorecard considered support for the following bills:

S.330, the "Voting Integrity and Verification Act of 2005"
S.450, the "Count Every Vote Act of 2005"
S.1130, the "Democracy Day Act of 2005"
S.Con.Res.53, "Reject Photo Identification Requirements for Voting"

For information on the scoring methodology and the legislation used, please see the scorecard

State-by-State Senate Election Reform Report: Nevada Wins Big

2005-12-26T02:18:00.000-06:00

As part of Headstrong America's 2005 Senate Election Reform Scorecard, an analysis of state-by-state support for key election reform legislation was conducted.

Nevada came in first place with 100% thanks to the hard work done by Senators Harry Reid (D-NV) and John Ensign (R-NV). Tied for second place are Vermont, Illinois, New York, and Minnesota at 93%. California takes third place with a score of 91%.

10 states get B's: Maryland, Michigan, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Oregon, Florida, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Montana, and South Dakota.

9 states get C's: Connecticut, North Dakota, Arizona, Iowa, Wisconsin, Indiana, Colorado, Louisiana, and Hawaii. The remaining 25 states received F's on this scorecard.

The scorecard considered support for the following bills:

S.330, the "Voting Integrity and Verification Act of 2005"
S.450, the "Count Every Vote Act of 2005"
S.1130, the "Democracy Day Act of 2005"
S.Con.Res.53, "Reject Photo Identification Requirements for Voting"

For information on the scoring methodology and the legislation used, please see the scorecard

17,000 E-mails to Congress for Impeachment/Censure

2005-12-24T15:32:00.000-06:00

The cross-country road-trip is finished, but your intrepid correspondent is still suffering a bit of Jeep-lag. That said, I got this e-mail from democrats.com this morning, and think this excerpt will be of general interest:

IMPEACHMENT BREAKTHROUGH

Since we told you Tuesday night about Congressman Conyers' new bills to hold Bush and Cheney accountable for their war lies, 26,000 people have visited the action alert page, and 17,000 have Emailed their Congress Members. You can add to those numbers here: http://capwiz.com/pdamerica/issues/alert/?alertid=8329176

Already there are seven cosponsors of a bill to create an investigation and make recommendations on impeachment, four cosponsors on a bill to censure Bush, and five cosponsors on a bill to censure Cheney. http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/5768

This work, combined with our polling on impeachment, and the news that Bush authorized illegal spying on Americans, has pushed impeachment into the media.

For many months the media wouldn't cover and Congress wouldn't talk about the public's demand for impeachment of Bush and Cheney because the pollsters wouldn't poll on it, and the pollsters wouldn't poll on it because it wasn't in the media and wasn't in Congress. Remember Gallup's excuse for not polling?
http://www.democrats.com/gallup-drop-dead

The week before Christmas, things changed. Look at the spike in instances of the I word in recent media punditry. http://www.impeachpac.org/?q=impeachment-news

And Congress Members and Senators are talking about impeachment. Rep. John Lewis says he favors it. Rep. John Conyers has introduced a bill to create an investigation into grounds for it, and seven other Congress Members have immediately signed on. Senator Barbara Boxer announced that she is asking legal scholars for advice on it. Senator Kerry said there are grounds for impeachment; then he flip-flopped -- but it wouldn't be Kerry without that.

No longer can pollsters honestly claim that they are refusing to ask the public about impeachment because it's not a topic in the news or the halls of Congress. But that doesn't mean they won't keep doing so dishonestly, unless we let them know how many of us are watching, unless we use the internet and the radio the way we did to force the Downing Street Minutes into the news.

ASK THE POLLSTERS TO POLL ON IMPEACHMENT:
http://www.democrats.com/bush-impeachment-polls

ASK THE MEDIA TO COVER THE ISSUE:
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/1084

Here's info on the few polls that have been done:
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/polling

Here's an analysis of the pollsters' inconsistency:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200512200006

Check Out Feingold's Blog at DailyKos.com

2005-12-22T10:06:00.000-06:00

I'm on a cross-country road-trip, so this is going to be brief. I did want to point visitors towards Sen. Feingold's comments today on the status of the USA-PATRIOT act at his blog at the Daily Kos.

Get a Free Russ Feingold Web-Sticker for Your Site

2005-12-20T13:35:00.000-06:00

It's never too early for name- and face-recognition, right?

I wrote a Web-sticker/News Aggregator for use on sites that support Senator Feingold as a presidential candidate in 2008. It's that thingie on the left wih his picture on it. It's free, no ads (except a "get this for your site" link) and no cookies. You can add it to your site with one line of JavaScript:


<SCRIPT language="JavaScript" src="http://headstrong-america.org/mag/russ.php?nitems=10&bitems=10" type="text/javascript"></SCRIPT>

You can change the number of news items and blog items with the nitems and bitems values. Also, you can change the colors, borders, fonts, and so forth by defining CSS attributes for .russ_box, .russ_header, and .russ_item. See this article for more information.

I'm open to tweaking this if anyone has constructive criticism or a better graphic. I'll monitor comments to this article.

(Note to the other Non-Hillary/Non-DLC Democrats: if you leave a comment here with a URL to a suitable image of your candidate, I'll make a similar widget for you and host the aggregator. Or, if you're comfortable with PHP, I'll public-domain the source code and send it to you.)

Sen. Feingold Asks For Your Input

2005-12-19T20:21:00.000-06:00

Fast emerging as a real, dynamic leader in the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party, Senator Russ Feingold asks for your opinions on The USA-PATRIOT Act, the Supreme Court Nomination, and issues from Energy to Foreign Policy at his Official Web Page.

Having stood up for our real American Values with respect to the Gulf War, the USA-PATRIOT Act, government ethics, the "Anti-Torture" Amendment, and the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge, I feel strongly that this is a leader who listens to "We The People."

By so ably fulfilling his responsibility to listen, to represent us on Capitol Hill, he reminds us of our responsibility as citizens to talk. I encourage every visitor to this page to show Sen. Feingold that we appreciate his receptiveness and open a dialogue with him on the issues that matter to you.

Headstrong-America has collected a list of On-Line Action Campaigns related to Sen. Feingold, including a petition to encourage him to run for President at HAPAD.

Here are some of the comments on the petition:

"This is Chris Bowers of MyDD. The day after the midterms are over, I'm ready to work for Senator Feingold in 2008."

"An honourable man and senator, I salute you."

"I would miss you as my senator, but you could do great things for our country!!"

"We need a strong leader that is not in the pockets of special interests. Russ Feingold could help bring back the respect and decency that America used to be known for."

If you know of other On-Line Action Campaigns related to Sen. Feingold, please take a moment to submit them to the directory. (I will approve the links without reciprocal links back to the directory.)

10 minutes later: another way I know Sen. Feingold's got his thumb on the pulse of the American People is all the hits I keep getting from senate.gov. :)

Take Action: Urge Your Senators to Say "NO" To ANWR Drilling

2005-12-19T12:23:00.000-06:00

The clock is ticking, folks. Time to bombard your Senators.

~~Today~~ On Wednesday, the Senate votes on the 2006 Defense Appropriations bill. Republicans included an amendment in this bill to open up the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge to drilling. Here's what our Democratic Leadership says about it:

"Debate about the future of the Arctic Refuge is a debate about our failed energy policy and our environmental legacy, not about the funding of our men and women and uniform, and it would be grossly irresponsible to include the drilling provision in the final Defense Appropriations bill," said Democrat Russ Feingold.

Once again, Senator Feingold leads the way. I'm going to look forward to campaigning for him in the 2008 Presidential Primaries. But, that's in the future. Here's what we have to do now:

Use the National Wildlife Federation's ANWR e-mail action campaign to contact let your Senators know you support a filibuster on the issue. Then call their office and make sure they get the picture.

HAPAD has some related action campaigns in the Environment Directory.

Poll: Pick The '08 Democratic Candidate Using IRV

2005-12-19T11:36:00.000-06:00

It's not too early to start thinking about party nominees for the 2008 elections. Right now, the Headstrong-America choices are, in order:

Russ Feingold
Al Gore
John Edwards
Howard Dean

demochoice.org has a ranked-ballot (a.k.a. Instant Runoff Voting) poll for 12 of the potential nominees. With 65 votes cast, the final four are:

Candidate	Votes	Percentage
Russ Feingold	24	(40.0%)
Barbara Boxer	12	(20.0%)
Al Gore	13	(21.7%)
Bill Richardson	11	(18.3%)

In the last runoff round, Russ Feingold wins with 50% of the vote.

If nothing else, participating in this poll should be a useful way of learning about the field of candidates, as well as familiarizing participants with how Instant Runoff Voting works. Give it a spin at demochoice.org

Introduction To The Conyers/Dodd VOTE Act

2005-12-18T21:36:00.000-06:00

On 24 Janurary, 2005, Senator Christopher Dodd introduced Senate Resolution 17, the "Voting Opportunity and Technology Enhancement Rights Act of 2005" to the Senate.

I lifted the following precis from The Senate Democratic Caucus's Election Reform Page:

Democrats are united in our effort to making voting reform a reality for all Americans. It is time for the opportunity of a fair and transparent voting system to be available to every voter. The Help America Vote Act made important steps forward and now it is time to continue to make reforms that will ensure each voter gets the opportunity to vote and all votes are counted.

Voter Verified Ballots. All voters must be able to ensure that their vote is accurately recorded. The bill requires that all voting systems used in Federal elections provide a voter verified ballot that is fully accessible to the disabled and ensures privacy and independence.

Election Day Registration. The bill requires each state to adopt Election Day registration procedures for Federal elections.

Uniform and Nondiscriminatory Standards for Counting Provisional Ballots. The bill requires that states count any otherwise eligible provisional ballot if cast anywhere in the state.

Shorter Lines at the Polls. Numerous and often widespread reports of long lines at the polls hinder the voting process. The bill requires states to meet Election Assistance Commission (EAC) mandatory standards that establish a minimum number of voting systems and poll workers which must provide geographic distribution.

Create a National Federal Write-In Absentee Ballot. The bill creates a National Federal Write-in Absentee Ballot (NFWAB) for Federal office that every and any eligible voter is entitled to cast from anywhere inside or outside the United States and requires the NFWAB be counted without regard to which polling place, precinct, local unit of government, state, or country the NFWAB is cast in.

Accurate and Transparent Voting Rolls. The bill requires states to provide public notice of all proposed purged names from voting rolls 60 days in advance of a Federal election. It also prohibits states from purging names of voters from the list without specific notice provided in accordance with National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).

Establish Early Voting. The bill requires states to establish early voting periods for a minimum of fifteen calendar days prior to a Federal election, with uniform mandatory Saturday hours, and a minimum of four hours per day, including Saturdays.

Investigate a Federal Election Day Holiday. The bill requires the Election Assistance Commission to study and make recommendations for a national voting holiday within six months of enactment of this Act.

Upgrade Voting Machines and Improve Ballot Designs. The bill requires punch card voting systems to provide in-person notice of over-votes and prohibits central count optical scan systems from meeting the voter verification requirements through an education system to ensure all votes are counted.

Create Uniform and Inclusive Voter Registration Standards. This bill establishes the right of a citizen to use the Federal voter registration form under NVRA to register to vote in Federal elections and directs the EAC to issue a revised form that requires a mandatory affidavit/signature attesting to both citizenship and age.

Establish Fair and Uniform Voter ID Rules. This bill expands the means for establishing voter identification to allow a voter to execute a written affidavit attesting to their identification.

Impartial Election Administrators. The bill requires notice provisions, public statements, and other transparency/accountability measures with regard to election administrators, changes in state election laws prior to Federal election,; modifications to polling places, and denial of requests by international and other non-partisan observers for access polling places.

Increase Funding to States. The bill provides additional appropriations to states for the requirement grant payments to meet the new requirements included in this bill.

On the day of the bill's introduction, it was referred to the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, where no action has been taken on it. The bill has 6 co-sponsors, Sen Jon Corzine [NJ], Sen Barbara Mikulski [MD], Sen Harry "Give 'em Hell" Reid, Harry [NV], Sen John D. Rockefeller, IV [WV], Sen Chuck Schumer [NY], and Sen Debbie Stabenow.

Headstrong America will create an Action Campaign for this bill within 24 hours. Check back here for more information.

Webmasters: Widget Lets Your Visitors Monitor Elections at Wikipedia

2005-12-18T18:40:00.000-06:00

WikiPedia is one of the most comprehensive places to research the 2006 Elections. Unfortunately, the search terms you need to enter to get to the information can be a little tricky. To help people get to the information they want, I wrote this HTML widget:

You can copy and paste the HTML from this box:

<form action="http://www.wikipedia.org/search-redirect.php" id="searchform"><fieldset style="border: 1px solid #aaaaaa; background-color: #f9f9f9; padding: 0.7em; font-size: 7pt; width: 150px; margin-top: 0.5em;"><center style="font-size: 10pt;">Research Upcoming Elections on WikiPedia</center><br><select name="search" id="searchInput" style="font-size: 7pt;"><option value="2008_Presidential_election">U.S. President, 2008</option><option value="U.S. House elections, 2006" selected="selected">House Elections, 2006</option><option value="U.S. Senate elections, 2006" >Senate Elections, 2006</option><option value="U.S. Gubernatorial elections, 2006">Governor Elections, 2006</option><br /><option value="Russ Feingold">Russ Feingold</option><option value="John Edwards">John Edwards</option><option value="Mark Warner">Mark Warner</option><option value="John Kerry">John Kerry</option><option value="Al Gore">Al Gore</option><option value="Ralph Nader">Ralph Nader</option><option value="Hillary Clinton">Hillary Clinton</option><option value="Evan Bayh">Evan Bayh</option><option value="Joe Biden">Joe Biden</option><br /><option value="Tom Daschle">Tom Daschle</option><option value="Wesley Clark">Wesley Clark</option><option value="Bill Richardson">Bill Richardson</option><option value="Rebecca Rotzler">Rebecca Rotzler</option><option value="Kat Swift">Kat Swift</option> <br /></select><table width="100%"><tr><td align="right"><br /><input type="submit" name="go" value="Search" /></td><td align="right" style="font-size:7pt;"><a href="http://headstrong-america.blogspot.com">Get this tool<br>for your site.</a></td><br /></tr></table><input type="hidden" name="language" value="en" ><br /></fieldset></form>

The widget is in the Public Domain. Feel free to copy it onto your desktop, or put it on your website. I would appreciate keeping the linkback to headstrong-america.

Put Progressive Action Alerts on Your Site: 1 Line of HTML

2005-12-18T13:06:00.000-06:00

Are you a Progressive Activist? Do you have a Web Site or Blog? Want to give your visitors a way to speak truth to power online?

By adding this line of HTML you can:

<SCRIPT language="JavaScript" src="http://headstrong-america.org/mag/syndaction.php?nitems=30" type="text/javascript">
View <a href=http://www.headstrong-america.org/p2/phpLD/>HAPAD</a> Action Alerts or <a href=http://www.headstrong-america.org/p2/phpLD/submit.php>Submit Your Action Alert</a></SCRIPT>

You can configure the number of items to show by changing "nitems=30" to whatever you want, and tweak the appearance by defining CSS for .hapad_box, .hapad_item, and .hapad_header. Here's an example:

.hapad_box {
color: #000000;
margin:0 0 0;
padding: 0 0 0 0;
font:bold 10pt Helvetica,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif;
color:#FFFFFF;
border-style:outset;
border-color:#666666;
background-color:#999999;
text-transform:lowercase;
text-align: center;
width: 100%;
}

.hapad_item {
margin: 0;
font-size: 9pt;
width: 100%;
background-color: #ffffff;
border-width: 0px;
color: #FF0000;
text-align: left;
}

.hapad_header {
margin:0 0 0;
padding: 0 0 0 0;
font:bold 100% Helvetica,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif;
color:#FFFFFF;
border-style:outset;
border-color:#666666;
width: 100%;
background-color:#999999;
text-transform:lowercase;
text-align: center;
border-color: #444444;
}

Items are sorted by their Google Page Rank. If you have any questions or requests feel free to post a comment here.

120 Ways to Save The World in 5 Minutes or Less

2005-12-17T15:53:00.000-06:00

Headstrong America has been scouring the Web for Progressive Action Campaigns to feature at the site. We encourage you to make your voice heard: sign a petition, send an e-mail to the President, Congress, or a Oil Company CEO today.

Topics at the Headstrong America Progressive Action Directory range from Alaskan Drilling to Women's Rights, organized in a Yahoo-like directory.

This is a directory of things you can do. I encourage everyone to submit their favorite action campaigns through the Submit A Link page.

For a more general list of progressive sites, I recommend Democratic Underground.

GovTrack.us: A Powerful Way to Watch Capitol Hill

2005-12-17T14:42:00.000-06:00

Just when you're sure you've seen everything, you get blasted out of your chair by something totaly unexpected.

I've been a user of the Thomas System at the Library of Congress for years now. Much like my Jeep, it has its faults, but gets the job done. Today, I stumbled into a system that gets the job done much better, GovTrack.us.

Let's take a walkthrough of some of this site's functionality.

Starting at the Election Reform Legislation Page, we get a list of all the relevent legislation in Congress. (As far as I can tell, it lists every relevent bill and some irrelevent ones -- better than the other way around.)
It shows a list of 50 or so bills with a short description. On this page, you can request to be sent an email whenever there is a change to any of these bills, subscribe to a RSS feed, or create a customized tracked events page.

But let's look deeper. Let's click on the "Verified Voting Gold Standard":
H.R. 550: To amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to require a voter-verified permanent paper record or hard copy under title III of such Act, and for other purposes.

On this page, you have the same options to monitor just this bill: subscribe to an RSS feed, get emails, or add it to a tracked events page. The page shows you a subset of the information available at Thomas, and gives you a link to Thomas for more information.

Here's where things start to get awesome. click on the "Other Info" tab, and you get a list of contributions that have been made to individual re-election campaigns to support this bill. You get the big picture:

Laborers Union:	$1,185,000
National Assn of Realtors:	$1,084,400
Assn of Trial Lawyers of America:	$1,034,500
United Auto Workers:	$797,800
Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers	$740,150

As well as details. Not to pick on anyone in particular, but the reelection campaign of Rep. Kendrick Meek [D-FL] cleared $34,000 for co-sponsoring this bill.

And that's not all. Let's take a look at a bill that's been voted on. You can look at a color-coded map of the votes, see a full list of yeas and nays, and see some interesting statistics on the vote. An example of this information is available here.

Cheers to Joshua Tauberer for his outstanding work on this site.

Patriot Act Expiring: How'd Your Senator Vote?

2005-12-16T12:32:00.000-06:00

It's been a good week for Democracy!

It would be hard to imagine, ten years ago, celebrating because the United States government decided to stop torturing people. But in the words of Paul McCartney, we live in "Strange days, indeed. Most peculiar, momma."

But, after thanking my representative for her vote, and after expressing my dismay with "Democratic" Representative Jim Marshall's pro-torture vote, I did some celebrating.

So I woke up this morning a little bleary-eyed and headachy, to read that the Senate Republicans gave up on trying to make the PATRIOT Act a permanent law of the land. Thanks to Senate Democrats, some of the provisions will now expire in two weeks. The story is here.

I'm not going to expostulate now on what a good thing this is for America. I'm not going to go on and on about what a good thing this is for the Democratic Party.

Instead, I'm going to go eat a Quarter-Pounder or two and think about how I'm going to thank Senator Russ Feingold for his ceaseless efforts leading the charge to let the worst parts of the PATRIOT Act expore.

But, before I do that, I want to make it easy for everybody to see how their Senators voted. It's really easy: just click here.

Naming Names: The Pro-Torture Representatives

2005-12-15T08:45:00.000-06:00

Last night, Representative John Murtha proposed an amendment to HR 2863 (the 2006 DoD Appropriations Bill) expressing support for Senator John McCain's campaign against the White House. (cf. NY Times)

The resolution, a symbolic one, passed. It passed 308-122. That's good.

But a question remains: who, in the name of all that is good and holy, voted against this amendment? The short answer is 1 Democrat and 122 Republicans. Here's the long answer:

The So-called Democrat who voted against is Jim Marshall of Georgia. His phone number in Washington is (202) 225-6531. I hope every Democrat will join me in making his life, and that of his staffers, miserable for a while.

Here are the Republicans:

Aderholt
Akin
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Barton (TX)
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Carter
Chabot
Coble

Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Deal (GA)
DeLay
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Everett
Feeney
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Granger
Graves
Hall

Hart
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hostettler
Hunter
Istook
Jindal
Johnson, Sam
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
LaHood
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Marchant
Marshall

McHenry
McKeon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Ney
Norwood
Nunes
Oxley
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Poe
Price (GA)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rehberg
Renzi
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher

Royce
Ryun (KS)
Schmidt
Sessions
Shadegg
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Turner
Weldon (FL)
Westmoreland
Wicker
Wilson (SC)
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

If you're not sure who your Representative is, you can use the "Contact Lawmakers" tool on the right sidebar to find out. You can also use it to send e-mails and to get phone numbers and mailing addresses. If your representative is on the list, I urge you to vent a little good-old fashioned American righteous indignation on them. Ruin their staffer's holidays.

(from: House Roll Call Vote 630)

Free Web Tool Allows Search of the MoveOn ActionForum

2005-12-14T23:54:00.000-06:00

As noted elsewhere in this Blog, the ActionForum at MoveOn is a great idea, but very poorly implemented.

One of the problems is that you can only view five items at a time. I wrote a work-around for that a couple of days ago and released it on this site. It's gotten a ton of hits, and I'm glad people are getting some use out of it.

One of the other big problems at ActionForum is finding items on the topic you're interested in. I have good news and bad news on that.

The good news is that you can now easily search score pages.

The bad news is that there's no easy way to get from a score page to a voting page. Also, for technical reasons, there's no good way to search voting pages.

If you really, really want to vote on an item you find using the search box below, you can, but it will take a few minutes and a little determination. The way to do it is like this:

note the date of the item you want to vote on
use the "Browse Box" below, set it to "Sort by Date"
set the number of items per page to something high like 500 or 1000
fiddle with the "Offset" until you get close to the item's date
use your browser's "Search" function to find the item

Like I said, it's a lot of work, but it's there for you if you want it.

The search functionality is useful for research. On the results page, you see the "Average Importance Rating" and the Number of "Agrees" for each item. It uses Google, so the most recent posts newer that one or two days won't show up. There's also no guarantee that it will show every post containing the words you're looking for.

Anyway the search box below is free to use. If you have a web site, feel free to steal it: I place it in the public domain.

Here's the HTML code:

H.A. 2005 Election Reform Scorecard

2005-12-13T12:55:00.000-06:00

This year's "Headstrong America Election Reform Scorecard" [PDF Excel Spreadsheet] has just been completed and has yielded some interesting results. The document scores U.S. Representatives for their support of three pieces of legislation:

HR 550: The Voting Integrity and Verification Act (the "Verified Voting Gold Standard")
HR 2690: The Voter's Choice Act (Instant Runoff Voting for Federal Elections)
HR 63: The Democracy Day Act (Election Day Holiday)

House Democrats, as a group, score 69 points, which sounds pretty bad, until you compare it to the Republican party's abysmal 3 points. Of the three parties, the Independent Caucus (i.e., Barney Frank of Vermont) with 72 points, scores highest overall.

But, the Democrats do have the three All-Stars: Cynthia McKinney [GA-4] leads the field as Election Reformer of the Year with a whopping 120 points. She co-sponsored HR 550 and HR 63, and got extra points for drafting HR 2690, "The Voter's Choice Act of 2005."

Hot on her heels, is John Conyers, Jr. [MI-14] with 110 points, who drafted HR 63 and co-sponsored HR 550.

The third All-Star is Rush Holt [NJ-12] with 105 points. Rep. Holt Drafted HR 550 and co-sponsored HR 63.

79 House Democrats scored a respectable 85 points by co-sponsoring both HR 63 and HR 550.
95 House Democrats and eight Republicans scored 75 points for co-sponsoring either HR 63 or HR 550. These representatives need a little nudge from their constituents.

24 House Democrats and 224 Republicans scored a big fat zero.

73% of Democrats co-sponsored HR 550, as opposed to 3.5% of Republicans. 51% of Democrats co-sponsored HR 63. No Republicans supported "Democracy Day." HR 2690 currently has no co-sponsors.

Information on these bills, and an on-line activism center to support their passage is available at http://headstrong-america.blogspot.com.

Another Web Widget For The Left

2005-12-12T18:38:00.000-06:00

I've gotten some nice feedback for the ActionForum widget I wrote, so I'm making this one available too.
If you have a web site and want to use the tool, just copy and paste this HTML:

<form action="http://www.wikipedia.org/search-redirect.php" id="searchform"><fieldset style="border: 1px solid #aaaaaa; background-color: #f9f9f9; padding: 0.7em; font-size: 7pt; width: 150px; margin-top: 0.5em;"><center style="font-size: 10pt;">Research Upcoming Elections on WikiPedia</center><br><select name="search" id="searchInput" style="font-size: 7pt;"><option value="2008_Presidential_election">U.S. President, 2008</option><option value="U.S. House elections, 2006" selected="selected">House Elections, 2006</option><option value="U.S. Senate elections, 2006" >Senate Elections, 2006</option><option value="U.S. Gubernatorial elections, 2006">Governor Elections, 2006</option><option value="John Edwards">John Edwards</option><option value="Mark Warner">Mark Warner</option><option value="John Kerry">John Kerry</option><option value="Al Gore">Al Gore</option><option value="Ralph Nader">Ralph Nader</option><option value="Hillary Clinton">Hillary Clinton</option><option value="Evan Bayh">Evan Bayh</option><option value="Joe Biden">Joe Biden</option><option value="Tom Daschle">Tom Daschle</option><option value="Wesley Clark">Wesley Clark</option><option value="Bill Richardson">Bill Richardson</option><option value="Rebecca Rotzler">Rebecca Rotzler</option><option value="Kat Swift">Kat Swift</option></select><table width="100%"><tr><td align="right"><input type="submit" name="go" value="Search" /></td><td align="right" style="font-size:7pt;"><a href="http://headstrong-america.blogspot.com">Get this tool<br>for your site.</a></td></tr></table><input type="hidden" name="language" value="en" ></fieldset></form>

I place the HTML for this widget in the public domain. Feel free to adjust it to fit your needs, all I request is to keep the link back to headstrong-america.

Tomorrow I'll take off my webmaster hat and get back to politics...

Frustrated with actionforum.com? Try this:

2005-12-12T12:38:00.000-06:00

MoveOn's ActionForum has a lot of problems. A lot of problems. It's not searchable, it's not categorized, you can only see five posts per page, and there's a lot of useless spam.

I did some tinkering over the weekend and was able to provide a solution to one of these problems. The widget below lets you show as many posts as you want at once. It also lets you sort posts by time or score.

(NEW!) You can now search ActionForum Score pages with a new web-widget. Give it a try here.

If you have a web site and want to use the tool, just copy and paste this HTML:

<form action="http://www.actionforum.com/forum/index.html" id="searchform" target="moveon"><fieldset style="border: 1px solid #aaaaaa; background-color: #f9f9f9; padding: 0.7em; width: 150px; margin-top: 0.5em;"><center><font size="-1"><b>Browse The MoveOn ActionForum</b></font></center><table style="font-size:7pt;"><tr><td>Start At:</td><td><input type="text" name="offset" value="0" size="5" maxlength="5"/></td></tr><tr><td>Show:</td><td><input type="text" name="count" value="100" size="5" maxlength="5" /> items</td><</tr><tr><td>Sort:</td><td><select name="order" id="searchInput" style="padding: 0; margin: 0; font-size: 1.0em;" /><option value="rating" selected="selected">By Score</option><option value="time" >By Date</option></select></td></tr><tr><td align="center"><input type="hidden" name="forum_id" value="266" ><input type="submit" name="go" value="Go" width="10" /></td><td align="right"><a href="http://headstrong-america.blogspot.com/2005/12/frustrated-with-actionforumcom-try.html">Get this tool<br>for your site.</a></td></tr></table></fieldset></form>

Feel free to adjust it to fit your needs, all I ask is to keep the link back to headstrong-america.

Try IRV at demochoice.org

2005-12-11T09:45:00.000-06:00

demochoice.org features fully-functional Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) polls which give you a chance to experience the power of IRV voting first-hand.

The system serves as a tutorial, showing you how your vote counts in each elimination round. As you click through the rounds, you see weaker candidates eliminated and their votes being reassigned to the remaining candidates. This continues to the final round, where the winner has collected more than 50% of the vote.

If you're not familiar with IRV, the system guides you along, giving useful advice, for example:

How should I vote?
Rank the candidates you support (first is best).
For each of them, click on the box next to the candidate, and then click on your rank for that candidate.
Note that:
Your lower choices won't hurt the chances of your higher choices.
If you don't rank a candidate, it means you'd rather not have your vote
count than have it count toward that candidate.
Only the order of your ranked candidates matters, and not the actual numbers.
You can't give two or more candidates the same rank.

The site hosts user-created IRV polls for free as a public service, and creating a poll is easy. Here are a few that I suggest trying out:

Democratic Party Nominee 2008: 6 Candidates. Currently Gore beats Edwards 66%-33%.
Democratic Party Nominee 2008: 8 Candidates. Feingold wins in round 2.
Democratic Candidates 2008: 12 Candidates. Feingold beats Gore 57%-43%.
Democratic/Independent Candidates 2008: 16 Candidates. Gore beats Richardson 58%-42%.

I'm particularly interested to see what people think of the demochoice system (too complicated? illuminating? an epiphany?), if you want to comment here on it, don't be bashful.

Some sources for more information:

Chris Gates' IRV Flash-Tutorial
headstrong-america's IRV explainer is here.
headstrong-america is hosting e-mail campaigns to support IRV. Look for the envelope icons on the right of the page

Feingold's Lobbying and Ethics Reform Act of 2005

2005-12-10T14:46:00.000-06:00

Senator Feingold's "Lobbying and Ethics Reform Act of 2005" will not solve all the problems of government corruption, but it is a step in the right direction, and is worthy of being made law. He introduced the legislation on July 14, 2005 and it was sent to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, where no action has been taken on it.
The bill, incredibly, has no cosponsors. It amends the McCain-Feingold "Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995" to require:

every member of the executive and legislative branch must identify all lobbying contacts made

decreases the "revolving door" syndrome by extending from one to two years the ban on senior government employees acting as lobbyists

"requires public disclosure by Members of Congress of employment negotiations"

establishes fines and penalties for wrongfully influencing "on a partisan basis, an entity's employment decisions or practices."

"Amends the Code of Official Conduct in the House to prohibit favoritism."

"Eliminates floor privileges and other perks for" lobbyists who formerly served in Congress."

"Prohibits Members of Congress from accepting gifts from lobbyists."

"Requires Members of Congress to provide increased disclosure of his or her official travel."

You can urge your Senators to support this legislation by
clicking here.

HAC: Support H.R. 63 the "Democracy Day Act of 2005"

2005-12-09T10:22:00.000-06:00

The purpose of the "Democracy Day Act of 2005" is to treat Election Day "in the same manner as any legal public holiday..."

It was introduced into the House by Representative John Conyers [D-MI] on 1/4/2005, has 107 co-sponsors, and has been sitting in the House Committee on Government Reform with no action for almost a year.

There is companion legislation in the Senate, S.1130, submitted 5/26/2005 by Senator Debbie Stabenow [D-MI] and referred to the House Committee on Government Reform. The Senate bill has only two co-sponsors, Senator Mary Landrieu and Senator Carl Levin. It has sat without action in the Senate Committee on the Judiciary since May.

This bill won't solve all the problems we face in our deeply flawed election system, that much is obvious. But it is a positive, concrete step in the right direction. Readers interested in supporting this idea should contact their Representative and Senators and urge them to co-sponsor this legislation and fight to make it law.

For your convenience, Headstrong America has created two Action Centers to assist you in contacting Congress in this matter.

E-mail your Representative to support the "Democracy Day Act of 2005"
E-mail your Senators to support the "Democracy Day Act of 2005"

The House Democrats' Long-Term Strategy

2005-12-08T19:47:00.000-06:00

An important part of a lawmaker's job is to keep two eyes on what's going on now and three more looking at the future. The House Democrats are making some important policy plans they've brought together under an umbrella they call "The Innovation Agenda." Here are some quick highlights and links for more information:

From http://www.housedemocrats.gov/:

INNOVATION AGENDA: A COMMITMENT TO COMPETITIVENESS TO KEEP AMERICA #1

Create an educated, skilled workforce in the vital areas of science, math, engineering, and information technology;

Invest in a sustained federal research and development initiative that promotes public-private partnerships;

Guarantee affordable access to broadband technology for all Americans;

Achieve energy independence in 10 years by developing emerging technologies for clean and sustainable alternatives that will strengthen national security and protect the environment; and,

Provide small businesses with the tools to encourage entrepreneurial innovation and job creation.

The plan is in-depth, and hard to summarize, but is really worth acquainting yourself with. For example, to foster a more competitive workforce in the technical fields, the Democratic Caucus proposes the following measures:

Educate 100,000 new scientists, engineers, and mathematicians in the next four years by proposing a new initiative, working with states, businesses, and universities, to provide scholarships to qualified students who commit to working in the fields of innovation.

Place a highly qualified teacher in every math and science K-12 classroom by offering upfront tuition assistance to talented undergraduates and by paying competitive salaries to established teachers working in the fields of math and science; institute a "call to action" to professional engineers and scientists, including those who have retired, to join the ranks of our nation’s teachers.

Create a special visa for the best and brightest international doctoral and postdoctoral scholars in science, technology, engineering and mathematics.

Make college tuition tax-deductible for students studying math, science, technology, and engineering.

We're in a war. We're being buried by an avalanche of governmental corruption. Our election system is a shambles, and we're destroying our environment. Even in this chaos, especially in this chaos, we've got to do what the HDC has done, and remember to keep an eye on America's economic future. We only get one future, working together, let's make it better.

Participate.net, Syriana, and Oil Change

2005-12-08T19:03:00.000-06:00

When I saw the movie "North Country," and saw it was produced by a company called Participant Productions, my liberal spidey-senses tingled. A couple of weeks later, I watched "Good Night and Good Luck," came home, and googled them.

Participant Production's newest release, "Syriana" opens nationwide tomorrow, and is accompanied by an on-line activism campaign for oil-independence. This is the neatest movie-accessory since McDonald's gave away Star Wars posters.

In broad terms, the movie is about corruption in the government and the oil industry. So is the action campaign. Here's a snippet from http://www.participate.net/oilchange/issue:

Oil addiction. It saps America’s economic strength, pollutes our environment, and jeopardizes national security. We need to break that addiction. The good news is, we have the technology to dramatically reduce our dependence right now, technology like hybrid cars and renewable energy. With ingenuity, we can turn those technologies into thriving new businesses that will make America safer, cleaner and more prosperous. It all begins with the choices we make as individuals.

Instead of oil dependence, let's choose Oil Change!

Here are a few of the actions you can participate in at http://www.participate.net/oilchange
:

Tell Congress it’s Time for an Oil Change

Learn How To Reduce Your Dependence On Oil

End human rights abuses in Nigeria’s oil region

Join the Virtual March On Washington

The jury's out on whether this is a great movie, but it's certainly a great idea. These guys have figured out how to get America's attention. I encourage you to give them a little of yours.

Create an Action Center at PEN

2005-12-04T20:18:00.000-06:00

The People's E-mail Network provides a service to host free "action centers" that let you create e-mail campaigns to the United State House of Representatives, the Senate, and local newspapers.

The first step is to go to The Action Center Page. Fill in the simple form and click the "Submit" button to access your "Action Page Manager."

From here, you can create an "Action Page." Write an e-mail from "Joan Q. Public" to either her U.S. Congressperson, her Senators, or her local newspaper. If you're a real wordsmith, you might be able to make an e-mail that's suitable for all three audiences.

In the "Action" field, enter some clear, concise text describing what you want done on your issue -- it will be used as the subject-line for the e-mails that are sent. When you're finished (please make sure to run a spell-check and eyeball the grammar), click the "Create/Modify" button and you'll have your e-mail campaign.

Make sure to keep track of the ID number you're assigned!

The system will provide you with a URL for your new Action Page like this one as well as a URL to check on the status of your campaign like this one.

The PEN software is evolving to meet the needs of its users, and has a goal of cross-pollinating action pages. From their home page:

Think about it . . . To mobilize more support for your own issues you will need as many supporters as possible. At The People's Email Network we believe the key to winning on any issue is multi-issue activism. Only if we speak out on each other's causes will any achieve the critical mass to prevail.

This is why we created the Issue Action Center. By featuring this modest sized button on your page, you are helping to encourage real activism on the most important issues of the day, including your own, displayed in menu form when you roll over it with your mouse.

If you have an issue you think the people want to speak on, give the PEN a try.

What I Like About Mark Warner

2005-12-04T14:43:00.000-06:00

In November The Daily Kos held an online straw poll for potential 2008 Democratic Presidential Candidates. Over 11,000 votes were submitted, and the results were much different than more mainstream polls.

Heading the list were the following potential candidates:

Wesley Clark at 26%
Russ Feingold at 19%
Mark Warner at 15%
John Edwards at 12%

This poll convinced me it was time to take a look at Mark Warner.

First, I'll say what I don't like about him: he's a big-business buzillionaire. As a co-founder of Nextel, he's rich enough to be a Republican candidate. However, his experience in government (in November 2005, Time magazine named Warner one of the five best governors in the U.S) testifies richly to his dedication to the people. Let's take a look:

Here's a few items from his Wikipedia article:

poll ratings indicate that he is the most popular Virginia Governor in a generation
his record approval ratings of nearly 75% comes in a state that traditionally has voted for the opposite party
co-founded Nextel as well as Capital Cellular Corporation, and built up an estimated fortune of over $200m
his business experience, Southern base, fundraising connections within high-tech and venture capital circles, and record of working with black leaders add up to what some see as an attractive political résumé

From http://draftmarkwarner.com/, he's credited with:

Turned a $6 billion deficit into a $544 Million surplus
Eliminated or merged more than 70 duplicative or unnecessary boards and commissions and eight state agencies
Salvaged Virginia’s threatened AAA bond rating
Double-digit unemployment has plummeted in 12 of 13 of the most distressed counties
97% of all eligible children enrolled in heath care
Single largest investment in K-12 education in state history
Second largest increase in college and university funding in the nation
Highest math SAT score increase in the nation

He's fiscally responsible, he knows how to manage an economy, and he's an effective education booster. These things do not a Democratic Candidate make, but they certainly do make him worth looking at.

To get to know him better, there's a useful article at The Philadelphia Inquirer. The streaming video of Mark Warner's Road to the White House is available here from CSPAN.org.

You can urge him to run (even though he's already announced his candidacy) at ipetitions.

Draft Al Gore for President in 2008

2005-12-04T13:44:00.000-06:00

Right now, my favorite candidates for the Democratic Nomination in 2008 are:

John Edwards
Mark Warner, and
Russ Feingold

But, somewhere in the back of my mind, I keep thinking about how nice it would be if Al Gore would run. So far, at one site, 2150 other people have encouraged him to throw his hat in to run in 2008. If you like his new-found take-no-prisoners style and would like him to run, I urge you to sign the petition below:

Sign the Petition to Urge Al Gore to Run in 2008.

To: Al Gore
We the people of the United States of America are extremely frustrated and angry with the present Republican leadership, and believe the country is headed dangerously in the wrong direction. There's been one colossal policy failure after another, and the current administration has perpetuated a culture of cronyism and corruption that's tarnished our good standing throughout the world. We need honesty, respect and integrity in the White House. We need thoughtful, innovative, intelligent and moral leadership.

The Iraq war has squandered $200+ billion, untold political capital, and thousands of American lives. The economy is challenged by unemployment, inflation, historic deficits and debt, skyrocketing gas and oil prices, declining consumer confidence and rising interest rates. We've been shamed and embarrassed by woefully inadequate natural disaster and terror preparedness, and mounting moral, ethical and legal scandals from the Republican leadership. And our precious environment has been abused and neglected.

We the people of the United States believe Al Gore not only won the popular vote in 2000 but the Electoral College as well, and was deprived of office only as a result of political and judicial chicanery in Florida and in the Supreme Court of the United States.

Therefore, we are signing this petition to draft Al Gore as our 2008 Democratic candidate for the presidency of the United States of America. We need a president of Al Gore’s experience and character to lead America back to peace and prosperity.

Mr. Gore, please run for president in 2008!

Sincerely,

The Undersigned

Sign the Petition to Urge Al Gore to Run in 2008.

HAC: Please Fight For "The Voting Integrity and Verification Act "

2005-12-04T12:49:00.000-06:00

Click here to tell your Senator you fight for the "The Voting Integrity and Verification Act of 2005!"

Senator, Please Fight For "The Voting Integrity and Verification Act"

On Feburary 9, 2005, Senator John Ensign introduced the "Voting Integrity and Verification Act of 2005" to the Senate. It was then promptly remanded to the Committee on Rules and Administration, where it has been languishing without action for ten months.

A large portion of the American electorate find this unacceptable.

We call on you, in the strongest possible terms, to use the power we have delegated to you to strike a blow for the idea of Democracy and move this bill forward to a vote on the Senate floor.

The bill is simple, Senator. It will:

(1) permit the voter to verify the accuracy of his or her ballot (in a private and independent manner) in an individual paper version before it is cast and counted; and
(2) require the voting system to produce an individual permanent paper record for each ballot cast which meets specified requirements relating to manual audit capacity

You have an opportunity to restore to the American people a little faith in the system. Please take the fullest advantage of it and fight for us for the prompt passage of S.330.

Click here to tell your Senator you fight for the "The Voting Integrity and Verification Act of 2005!"

HAC: Get the "Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act" To The Senate

2005-12-04T12:39:00.000-06:00

This is a new Headstrong America E-Mail Campaign (HAC) to tell the Senate that we want "voter verification and mandatory paper record audit capacity," increased enforcement for the Help America Vote Act, and a system of "random, unannounced, hand counts of the voter-verified records for each Federal general election."

Click here to tell your Senator you fight for the "Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2005."

Senator, Help Restore our Faith in the Electoral System

My reason for writing you is to urge you in the strongest possible terms to draft a Senate companion resolution to H.R. 550, the "Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2005."

This is a simple, straightforward piece of legislation that should appeal to anyone with any interest in the great experiment of American Democracy. Among other things, it calls for "voter verification and mandatory paper record audit capacity," increases enforcement for the Help America Vote Act, and calls for a system of "random, unannounced, hand counts of the voter-verified records for each Federal general election."

This legislation will help to restore confidence to an electorate that feels ill-served by the 2000 and 2004 elections. We are a democracy where half the eligible voters don't register. Where the electorate's support for Congress and the President is below forty percent. It's time to energize the electorate. You are in a position to help revitalize our democracy and bring dissatisfied Americans back to the polls.

The American people are looking to you for leadership, Senator. Please don't let us down.

Click here to tell your Senator you fight for the "Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2005."

HAC: Support A Senate IRV Bill

2005-12-04T12:32:00.000-06:00

This is a new Headstrong America E-Mail Campaign (HAC) to tell the Senate that we want Instant Runoff Voting for Federal Elections.

Click here to tell your Senator to fight for Instant Runoff Voting in Federal Elections!

Senator, Please Help Us Make Instant Runoff Voting a Reality

For the past ten years, legislation has been introduced into the House of Representatives for the use of Instant Runoff Voting in federal elections. Each time, the resolution has died in committee. The time has come to take action in the Senate.

I urge you in the strongest possible terms to:

- Draft a bill similar to HR 2690, and
- Help us fight to get the bill to the floor for an up-or-down vote

A substantial portion of the American electorate feels ill-served by the elections of 2000 and 2004. We are a democracy where half the eligible voters don't register. Where the electorate's support for Congress and the President is below forty percent. It's time to energize the electorate. You are in a position to help revitalize our democracy, bring dissatisfied Americans back to the polls, and increase the breadth of public debate by supporting this important idea.

Click here to tell your Senator to fight for Instant Runoff Voting in Federal Elections!

Miserable Failure

2005-12-03T17:41:00.000-06:00

Once again, computer algorithms unveil the nature of the universe to us. Click the button for a laugh from Google.

Merge The Left with IRV

2005-12-03T16:39:00.000-06:00

Do you wish you could have voted for Nader and Gore in 2000? There is important legislation in the House of Representatives that would allow you to do just that, using "Instant Runoff Voting," or, as it's sometimes called "Ranked-Choice Voting."

You can peruse the legislation here. If you already support Instant Runoff Voting, sign the online petition to urge your Representative to co-sponsor this bill.

The basic idea is this: on your ballot you get to make a first choice and a second choice. All the ballots are counted. If a candidate gets over 50%, they win. If not, the field is narrowed down to the two leading candidates.

Consider the following (fictitious) example. Say you have three (fictitious) candidates, Bush, Gore, and Nader. After round 1, Bush has 42% of the vote, Gore has 40% of the vote, and Nader has 18%. Nader, having come in last place, is eliminated.

The next step is to look at the second-choice candidates on Nader's ballots. Say 83% of the people who voted for Nader had Gore as their second choice, and 17% had Bush as their second choice. We award Nader's ballots to the remaining two candidates. Since Gore has 52% of the vote, he wins.

The benefit of this approach is that it encourages folks to support third parties. There is research that suggests it increases votership overall. That's a good thing, right?

There is cross-partisan support for this approach, for example John McCain, Howard Dean, and Ralph Nader all have expressed support for IRV (cf. Wikipedia).

The knife cuts both ways. It opens the doors to third parties on the right just as much as to the left. But it makes the parties compete for our votes. I strongly feel that's a good thing.

IRV is an old idea, first used in Australia in 1893. It's been used and considered for use in several American cities and states, for more info see the above Wikipedia article.

Click here to send the following e-mail to your Representative in Congress.

On May 26, 2005, Representative Cynthia McKinney introduced H.R.2690, the "Voter Choice Act of 2005," which requires the use of Instant Runoff Voting for General Elections for Federal Office.

Since that date, the resolution has been collecting dust in committee, as similar resolutions have for the past ten years.

I urge you in the strongest possible terms to:

- Co-sponsor this resolution, and
- Help us fight to get the resolution to the floor for an up-or-down vote

A substantial portion of the American electorate feels ill-served by the elections of 2000 and 2004. We are a democracy where half the eligible voters don't register. Where the electorate's support for Congress and the President is below forty percent. It's time to energize the electorate. You are in a position to help revitalize our democracy, bring dissatisfied Americans back to the polls, and increase the breadth of public debate by supporting this important legislation.

ApolloAlliance:Good Jobs/Clean Energy

2005-12-03T11:43:00.000-06:00

The Apollo Alliance is doing some exciting work and is worth looking into. Here's a slightly marked-up version of their "Agenda for Action":

"Americans have always pulled together during tough times to accomplish great missions. We can do it again. This time we need a moonshot for energy independence and good jobs. A crash program for sustainable energy independence would:

create three million good jobs,
free the nation from imported oil, and
promote a healthier environment.
States and cities are leading the way toward a clean energy future. Now, the time has come for our nation to take up the challenge."

The Apollo Alliance has surprising breadth, including United Steelworkers of America, the Sierra Club, and Democrats from the House and Senate. Furthermore, their 10-point-plan is smart and straightforward:

Promote Advanced Technology & Hybrid Cars
Invest In More Efficient Factories
Encourage High Performance Building
Increase Use of Energy Efficient Appliances
Modernize Electrical Infrastructure
Expand Renewable Energy Development
Improve Transportation Options
Reinvest In Smart Urban Growth
Plan For A Hydrogen Future
Preserve Regulatory Protections

The Apollo Alliance has an e-mail your Senator campaign urging your Senator to "go back to the drawing board and present to the American people a bold plan for energy independence – one that creates jobs, protects the environment and ends our dependency on foreign oil." It's well worth a look.

Look Inside Congress with Thomas

2005-12-03T09:56:00.000-06:00

(For the purposes of this article, the word "bill" will be used to mean "bill" or "resolution".)

Thomas is a very useful Internet-based tool run by the Library of Congress. It has several functions, such as:

Full-text searching of bills and resolutions
Full-text searching of the Congressional Record
Searching for bill sponsored or co-sponsored by legislator
In-depth information about a bill's contents and status

Let's take an example and work through some of Thomas' features.

Searching Bill Text

First, click here to open a Thomas window.

In the center of the page, you'll see a form allowing you to "Search Bill Text." Enter "Instant Runoff Voting" and click search.

A results page will come up. Among the results, you'll see

1 . Voter Choice Act of 2005 (Introduced in House)[H.R.2690.IH]

click on this link and you'll go to the full text of the bill, and be provided with links to further information.

If the resolution had been debated on the House floor, clicking the "Congressional Record References" link would take you to a transcript of the debate.

Clicking on the "Bill Summary and Status" link gives you a wealth of information on the bill. The "All Information (Except Text)" link is probably the most useful.

On this page, you can find a plain-language summary of the bill, a list of legislative actions that have been taken on it, a list of the bill's co-sponsors, links to related bills and amendments.

Also, if the bill has been referred to one or more committees, that information is presented.

Searching by Congressperson

Now, let's go back to the Thomas main page.

Find the "Browse Bills by Sponsor" list-box in the center of the page and scroll down to "McKinney, Cynthia [D-GA-4]" and click "Go." This gives you a list of all the bills Rep. McKinney sponsored in the current Congress. You can click on any bill to find out more about it as in the previous section.

Linking to a Thomas Legislation Page

If you want to make a link to information on a bill, don't use the URL obtained from your search. These are temporary links and will stop working in a few hours.

To make a permanent link, you have to know which Congress it was submitted in (i.e. 109th for 2005-2006), whether it was introduced in the Senate or the House, and the bill number. Look at these links:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:h.r.1234:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:s.303:

The first links to House Resolution 1234 in the 109th Congress. The second links to Senate Resolution 303 in the 109th Congress.

More information on linking is available here.

Searching The Congressional Record

To search the 109th (2005-2006) session of Congress, go to the page http://thomas.loc.gov/home/r109query.html. The search form has several options, but they're pretty self-explanatory. Type in "Able Danger" and click "Search" at the bottom. The results page will come up with a list of links such as:

1 . ABLE DANGER -- (House of Representatives - November 18, 2005)

Click on that to see Representatives Curt Weldon and John Murtha on the Able Danger issue as well as testimony from former FBI director Louis Freeh.

For More Information

An exhaustive introduction for all of Thomas' functionality is available here.

Help Ensure Every Vote Counts in '06

2005-11-26T14:55:00.000-06:00

To make a democracy work, we need voters. To increase the number of voters in upcoming elections, it's crucial to restore the electorate's faith in the vote.

On October 21 2005, the House Committee on Government Reform issued a report critical of voting systems in several states. Among the vulnerabilities noted by the GAO are:

Cast ballots, ballot definition files, memory cards, and audit logs could be modified.
Voting machine vendors had weak security practices, including the failure to conduct background checks on programmers and system developers, and the failure to establish clear chain of custody procedures for handling software.

Furthermore, the report pointed out several real-life failures in current voting systems, such as:

In California, a county presented voters with an incorrect electronic ballot, meaning they could not vote in certain races.
In Pennsylvania, a county made a ballot error on an electronic voting system that resulted in the county’s undervote percentage reaching 80% in some precincts.
In North Carolina, electronic voting machines continued to accept votes after their memories were full, causing over 4,000 votes to be lost.

The Help America Vote Act (HAVA), passed in 2002 was insufficient to solve these problems.

Fortunately, more legislation has been introduced to Congress to solve these problems.

House Resolution 550 Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2005
The Senate has no companion resolution to HR 550.
House Resolution 704 Voting Integrity and Verification Act of 2005
Senate Resolution 330Voting Integrity and Verification Act of 2005

Unfortunately, all three resolutions have been stuck in committee since Feburary 2005. Why doesn't the Republican-controlled Congress want your vote to count?

What Can You Do?

Join the e-mail campaign to pressure your representatives to co-sponsor HR 550 and HR 704
Find out how your state stands in verified voting.
The Verified Voting Foundation has a number of on-line petitions
They also have an "adopt-a-legislator" program that moveon would do very well to copy

Is Your Representative on the House Committee on Administration?

If so, contact them directly to ask them to report HR 550 and HR 740 favorably to the House.

Robert W. Ney, (R-OH) http://ney.house.gov/
Vernon J. Ehlers, (R-MI) http://www.house.gov/ehlers/
John L. Mica (R-FL) http://www.house.gov/mica/
John T. Doolittle (R-CA) http://www.house.gov/doolittle/
Thomas M. Reynolds (R-NY) http://www.house.gov/reynolds/
Candice Miller (R-MI) http://candicemiller.house.gov/
Juanita Millender-McDonald (D-CA) http://www.house.gov/millender-mcdonald/
Robert Brady (D-PA) http://www.house.gov/robertbrady/
Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) http://www.house.gov/lofgren/

Ask Your Senators to Draft a Setate Version of the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2005

You can find your Senators at http://www.senate.gov/.

To take back the Government, we must take back the vote.

'06 Elections Coming Soon!

2005-11-26T11:35:00.000-06:00

In the Senate: 33 seats are up for grabs. Fifteen of those are currently Republican. But, barring a Democrat 1994, what we can expect is 47 senate seats.

In the House: every seat is up for grabs, we only need 16 to reclaim the majority.

Here are some things you can do:

1) Don't get caught with your pants down. Register to vote early. You can download the form at http://www.fec.gov/votregis/pdf/nvra.pdf and mail it in. The file includes instructions.

2) Familiarize yourself with the big picture and your local races. Here are some starting places:

MoveOn's 2006 endorsements are at:

http://political.moveon.org/2006/endorsed.html

and a look from the other side of the aisle:

http://usconservatives.about.com/li...006senraces.htm

3) Look into the DNC's 50 State Policy to find out what's going on in your state and get in contact with local organizing groups. Find out more at http://www.democrats.org/local.html.

4) Support the Party: Buy A Democracy Bond

"The Republicans raise $10 million every month from corporate interests and lobbyists. The Democratic Party will never be able to compete in the traditional ways with a party that has abandoned the people and taken selling access and influence to a new level... But we can do it if half a million people are giving $20 a month to change the way our political process works."

You can learn more and contribute online at http://www.democrats.org/democracybonds.html.

5) Check out the issues

The Innovation Agenda at http://democrats.house.gov
House Democrats on the Issues: http://democrats.house.gov/issues/index.cfm
DNC on the Issues: click issues at http://www.democrats.org
The Senate Democratic Caucus: http://democrats.senate.gov

6) Familiarize yourself with MoveOn's current campaigns at

http://www.moveon.org/campaigns.html

7) Consider joining a MoveOn Democracy Team at

http://www.moveon.org/team/

Taking back America in 2006 will take work, but working together, we can make it happen.

	Now	1/2006	10/2005	11/2004
Overall	34%	42%	35%	51%
Iraq	30%	37%	32%	40%
Economy	32%	39%	34%	42%
Energy	27%	--	--	--