|
|
|
Bush Pushes Congress on 'No Child' Law
U.S. Legal News |
2007/10/10 15:24
|
President Bush said that he's open to new ideas for changing the "No Child Left Behind" education law but will not accept watered-down standards or rollbacks in accountability. The president and lawmakers in both parties want changes to the five-year-old law — a key piece of his domestic policy legacy, which faces a tough renewal fight in Congress. "There can be no compromise on the basic principle: Every child must learn to read and do math at, or above, grade level," he said in a statement Tuesday from the Rose Garden that was directed at Congress and critics of the law. "And there can be no compromise on the need to hold schools accountable to making sure we achieve that goal." The law requires annual math and reading tests in grades three through eight and once in high school. Schools that miss benchmarks face increasingly tough consequences, such as having to replace their curriculum, teachers or principals. Earlier, Bush and Education Secretary Margaret Spellings met with civil rights leaders, educators and advocates for minority and disadvantaged students. Almost everyone agrees the law should be changed to encourage schools to measure individual student progress over time instead of using snapshot comparisons of certain grade levels. There also is broad agreement that the law should be changed so that schools that miss progress goals by a little don't face the same consequences as schools that miss them by a lot. There are, however, deep divisions over some proposed changes, including merit pay for teachers and whether schools should be judged based on test scores in subjects other than reading and math. Opponents to some of the legislative proposals come from the conservative and liberal wings of Congress. National Urban League President Marc Morial, who was in the meeting with Bush, said the law hasn't been funded even to the levels authorized in the original legislation. But he and others did not lay the blame entirely at Bush's feet. "Both Congress and the president should make the collective funding of this act a priority," Morial said. Morial said he and others also talked to Bush about addressing the disparity in the amount of money committed to educating children in different parts of the country, and about strengthening a provision in the law calling for after-school services to help children who fall behind. Bush listed several ways for enhancing the law: _Give local leaders more flexibility and resources. _Offer other educational options to families of children stuck in low-performing schools. _Increase access to tutoring programs. _Reward good teachers who improve student achievement in low-income schools. _Expand access to advanced placement courses. _Improve math and science instruction. The president noted national test results released last month that showed elementary and middle schoolers posting across-the-board gains in math and more modest improvements in reading. But he also noted that nearly half of Hispanic and black students still do not graduate from high school on time. |
|
|
|
|
|
Atlantic City Mayor Robert Levy Resigns
U.S. Legal News |
2007/10/10 12:59
|
The mayor of Atlantic City has handed in his resignation, after he vanished for two weeks amid allegations that he lied about his military service, his attorney said Wednesday. Levy's departure is effective immediately, according to attorney Edwin Jacobs. On Tuesday, the missing mayor resurfaced after returning home from a stay at a psychiatric and substance abuse center. In a statement Wednesday, Jacobs cited "multiple health problems" as a factor in Levy's resignation, but did not provide further details. Levy has been under federal investigation for embellishing his Army service in Vietnam. "The circumstances surrounding his resignation include multiple health problems, but were precipitated by a pending Federal Department of Veterans Affairs investigation," Jacobs said. Last fall, the Press of Atlantic City reported that the Vietnam veteran's claims that he was a member of the Green Berets were untrue. He apologized, but federal authorities have been looking into whether the 64-year-old Levy made that claim to increase his veteran's benefit payments. Jacobs said in the statement that the mayor was in discussions with the U.S. Attorney's Office about resolving the investigation in a "fair and expeditious" way. Levy allegedly took in about $25,000 in extra benefits payments as a result of the falsification. No part of the investigation includes allegations of Levy's abuse of his position as mayor, his lawyer said. Levy served in the United States Army for 20 years, form 1964-1984 and served two tours of duty in Vietnam, from which he received multiple medals, awards and citations, according to Jacobs. "The pending investigation has called into question two of those awards, neither of which appear to be supported by an appropriate military order," said Jacobs. Members of the city council had asked a judge to declare the mayor's office vacant and clear the way for the council president to take over as interim mayor. Levy — who was missing for almost two weeks — was at home after leaving a Somerset County clinic known for treatment of substance abuse and mental health issues, according his lawyer. Tuesday's revelation about Levy's whereabouts came after a brief conference with a state judge, who scheduled a Friday hearing to discuss a request by a city councilman to declare that the mayor had abandoned his office. |
|
|
|
|
|
Bush faces GOP foes on budget cuts
U.S. Legal News |
2007/10/09 17:06
|
Congressional Democrats have found an unexpected ally in their budget showdown with President Bush: Republicans.
The president is pushing to cut and even eliminate some popular domestic programs that pump billions of dollars into the states. Many congressional Republicans, wary of the potential fallout from the loss of funds, have joined Democrats to oppose the cuts. California alone has hundreds of millions of dollars at stake.
More than a week into the new fiscal year, Congress has yet to send Bush any of its 12 spending bills. And Bush has threatened to veto most of those that have been approved by the House or the Senate, accusing lawmakers of overspending in a time of budget deficits. But Democrats have stood their ground, not only rejecting many of the proposed cuts, but adding more funds for programs they believe have been neglected.
"We didn't overspend; the president under-funded," Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) said during debate last week on a spending bill that Bush has threatened to veto.
And they're getting help from some Republicans who, unlike the president, must run for reelection in communities that rely on Washington's money for community development, housing, anti-crime programs and other activities. For example, Rep. David Dreier (R-San Dimas) helped engineer a successful bipartisan effort in the House to boost to $460 million the federal funding to reimburse states for jailing illegal immigrants. Bush has proposed no money for the program.
Bush wants to cut federal aid programs by about $3.8 billion, according to Federal Funds Information for States, a Washington-based organization. The House has called for an increase of $13.8 billion, and the Senate is headed toward a $10-billion increase.
Sean Kevelighan, a spokesman for the White House budget office, said the administration had pushed to reduce overall funding to provide more money to serve the communities in greatest need.
Democrats will need GOP support if they are to override Bush's promised vetoes. Democrats hold narrow majorities in the House and Senate; it takes two-thirds of each chamber to override a veto.
So Democrats were delighted last week when Sen. Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.) took to the Senate floor complaining about the president's proposed $1.6-billion cut in aid to state and local law enforcement at a time when violent crime is on the rise. The Senate next week is expected to approve a bill that would spend $550 million on the Community Oriented Policing Services program, which provides grants for state and local law enforcement agencies. Bush proposed cutting the program to $32 million, from about $500 million. The House has approved $725 million. |
|
|
|
|
|
Democrats demand interrogation memos
U.S. Legal News |
2007/10/05 15:44
|
Senate and House Democrats demanded Thursday to see two secret Justice Department memos that reportedly authorize painful interrogation tactics against terrorism suspects. The memos -- legal opinions written in 2005 -- do not reverse the administration policy issued in 2004 that publicly renounced torture, White House and Justice Department spokespeople said. Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.) sent a letter to the acting attorney general saying the administration's credibility was at risk.
The memos are "critical to an appropriate assessment" of tactics approved by the White House and the Justice Department, Rockefeller wrote to Acting Atty. Gen. Peter D. Keisler. "Why should the public have confidence that the program is either legal or in the best interests of the United States?" he asked.
House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) and House Judiciary Committee member Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) promised a congressional inquiry into the memos, which reportedly explicitly authorized painful and psychological tactics.
"Both the alleged content of these opinions and the fact that they have been kept secret from Congress are extremely troubling, especially in light of the department's 2004 withdrawal of an earlier opinion similarly approving such methods," Conyers and Nadler wrote to Keisler on Thursday. Their letter requested copies of the memos.
They also asked that Steven G. Bradbury, who heads the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, "be made available for prompt committee hearings."
The New York Times disclosed the memos in Thursday's editions. It reported that the first 2005 legal opinion authorized the use during terrorism interrogations of slaps to the head, freezing conditions and simulated drownings, known as water-boarding.
That secret opinion explicitly allowed using the painful methods in combination and was issued "soon after" Alberto R. Gonzales became attorney general in February 2005, the New York Times reported. In a December 2004 opinion, the Justice Department had publicly declared torture "abhorrent," and the administration seemed to back away from claiming authority for such practices.
A second secret Justice Department opinion was issued later in 2005, as Congress was working on an anti-torture bill. That opinion said none of the CIA's interrogation practices would violate the legislation's bans on "cruel, inhuman and degrading" treatment of detainees, the New York Times said, citing interviews with unnamed current and former officials.
The December 2004 legal opinion remains in effect, Justice Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse said.
"Neither Atty. Gen. Gonzales nor anyone else within the department modified or withdrew that opinion," Roehrkasse said in a statement. "Accordingly, any advice that the department would have provided in this area would rely upon, and be fully consistent with, the legal standards articulated in the December 2004 memorandum."
White House Press Secretary Dana Perino told reporters: "This country does not torture. It is a policy of the United States that we do not torture, and we do not."
Perino would not comment on whether the 2005 opinions authorized specific interrogation practices, such as slaps to the head and simulated drowning. She initially said the first classified opinion was dated Feb. 5, 2005, but White House spokesman Tony Fratto corrected that, saying the memo was dated months later. Another administration official said it was dated May 2005.
The dispute may come down to how the Bush administration defines torture, and whether it allowed U.S. interrogators to interpret anti-torture laws beyond legal limits.
Perino said the president "had done everything within the corners of the law to make sure that we prevent another attack on this country."
CIA spokesman George Little said the agency sought guidance from the Bush administration and Congress to make sure its program to detain and interrogate terrorism suspects followed U.S. law.
"The program, which has taken account of changes in U.S. law and policy, has produced vital information that has helped our country disrupt terrorist plots and save innocent lives," Little said in a statement. "The agency has always sought a clear legal framework, conducting the program in strict accord with U.S. law, and protecting the officers who go face to face with ruthless terrorists."
Congress has prohibited cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of terrorism suspects. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said several extreme techniques, including water-boarding, were specifically outlawed. |
|
|
|
|
|
Craig to Stay in Office for Time Being
U.S. Legal News |
2007/09/27 14:46
|
Craig's lawyers asked a Minnesota judge Wednesday to let the three-term senator withdraw his guilty plea in a sex sting at a Minneapolis airport restroom. Afterward, Craig issued a statement saying he will stay in office "for now." People close to Craig said that means until the judge rules. Hennepin County Judge Charles Porter said that will be at the end of next week at the earliest. Craig said earlier he planned to resign Sept. 30, then left the door open to stay if he could successfully withdraw his plea. Craig, serving his third term as senator, pleaded guilty in August to disorderly conduct following a June 11 sting operation in a men's room at the Minneapolis airport. That he will stay in the Senate past Sunday was an unwelcome development for Senate Republican leaders who have made clear they wish Craig would step down and let Idaho's GOP governor, C.L. "Butch" Otter name a replacement.
Otter canceled an extended tour of the state's overcrowded prisons this week to interview some of the nearly 30 people _ including Lt. Gov. Jim Risch and Attorney General Lawrence Wasden _ who have publicly expressed interest in Craig's job. "He wanted to be ready to act if we received a letter of resignation," said Jon Hanian, Otter's spokesman in Boise. "Obviously, we had not. ... Until he receives a letter of resignation, we have no vacancy, therefore, there is no replacement." Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., told reporters he had nothing to add to previous statements in which he said he thought Craig made the proper decision on Sept. 1, when he announced his intention to resign by month's end. Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, Craig's strongest ally in the Senate, said that Craig, "like every citizen facing allegations, deserves to be able to fully defend himself." Craig's lawyer, Billy Martin, said it is "near impossible, and it should be" for Craig to withdraw his plea. But he said his client's conduct _ shoe tapping and hand gestures under a men's room stall divider _ was not criminal. The arresting officer described those gestures as signals recognized in the gay community as an invitation for sex. Craig has repeatedly said he is not homosexual. Jim Weatherby, professor emeritus of political science at Boise State University, said Craig has been permanently weakened by the charges. "How effective can he be, when his leadership wants him out?" Weatherby asked. "I suspect they would want to punish him further than the steps they've already taken." Craig gave up his leadership posts on Senate committees after his arrest become public. Senate Republicans would have to vote to restore those posts, an action seen as highly unlikely. |
|
|
|
|
|
Is Vermont lawyer being wiretapped?
U.S. Legal News |
2007/09/23 16:40
|
A Vermont lawyer representing a client being held at Guantanamo, Cuba, is worried that his phone is being tapped by the federal government.
He ought to be. The federal government may have interpreted the revised federal surveillance law to allow it to wiretap the lawyers of Guantanamo prisoners.
The Vermont Public Service Board heard testimony last week about the suspicions of lawyer Bob Gensburg of St. Johnsbury, who says his phone line has inexplicably gone dead and has been subject to strange buzzing noises. Gensburg is one of Vermont's most respected lawyers, and he is not likely to be imagining these occurrences or to be making them up.
The PSB has already involved itself in the issue of unwarranted spying by the government, mounting an investigation into whether Verizon and AT&T had turned over phone calling records to the National Security Agency without warrants. The federal government has sued to block the PSB's investigation, and those in other states, on the grounds that it would jeopardize national security to talk about the activities of the telephone companies.
Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence, may have undermined the government's case last month when he acknowledged in an interview that the telecommunications companies had helped the government carry out its program of warrantless electronic spying. It will be harder for the government to argue in court that it cannot talk about the phone companies' role now that the nation's spy chief has talked about it. The Public Service Board is now receiving briefs from the parties in the case in response to McConnell's admission.
Meanwhile, Gensburg wonders if his calls to Afghanistan on behalf of his client are being monitored by the government. If so, it would be an unconscionable breach of the lawyer-client privilege.
Gensburg is not the only Vermonter with connections to Afghanistan. Others have relatives working there or friends living there. One editor of our acquaintance telephoned a friend in Kabul within the past two years. The question inevitably arises: Was the telephone contact monitored or subject to the government's efforts at data mining?
Data mining and warrantless spying on international calls are being carried out in the name of the war on terrorism. So is the detention of Afghans and others at Guantanamo, without charges, with limited access to lawyers, and without recourse to the law. The possibility of unaccountable secret detention of American citizens still exists because of the erosion of the habeas corpus rights that are supposed to be part of our constitutional birthright. Last week the Senate failed to end a Republican filibuster of a bill authored by Sen. Patrick Leahy that would have restored our habeas corpus rights.
No one knows if Gensburg's phone has been tapped, but the Bush administration's disregard for constitutional protections creates an atmosphere of fear and suspicion that make the possibility seem real. One of the great advantages of a democracy is that we need not live in fear that the government will be rifling through our desk drawers or spying on private communications.
As for the telephone companies, it was their responsibility to know right from wrong and to stand up to the government when it sought their cooperation in illegal surveillance. The companies are seeking immunity in Congress for their actions. Instead, the investigations in Vermont and elsewhere need to move forward to hold those accountable, in government and the private sector, for actions that compromised our constitutional rights. No one in Vermont or anywhere else should have to fear that a phone call to Kabul is going to get them in trouble — unless the government has reasonable grounds to believe that a particular individual is actually involved in criminal activity.
For the government to monitor the phone calls of a lawyer or to cast out a vast electronic dragnet is for it to practice the methods of the Soviet Union or East Germany. The Vermont PSB now has an important role in checking the excesses of the government and private companies in spying on innocent Vermonters.
|
|
|
|
|
Recent Lawyer News Updates |
|
|