Rep. Adam Smith on Changes to National Security Team

There has been a lot of bipartisan support for the changes Obama's proposing to his national security team. Even Mitch McConnell has issued a statement saying "the President is to be commended for choosing competence and continuity in asking General Petraeus to serve as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and Leon Panetta as Secretary of Defense." This seems to suggest that Obama's nominees won't face too much resistance as they go through the nomination process.

As I've been covering events on the Hill, I've quickly learned that the ranking member on the House Armed Services Committee, Congressman Adam Smith (WA-09), is someone who is extremely knowledgeable about military issues and isn't simply going to praise Obama because he's a Democrat. He's also had to worked closely with both Leon Panetta and General Petraeus through the various committee assignments he has. So while the approval process for the nominees only goes through the Senate, I wanted to take a moment and highlight the statement Rep. Smith made in response to Obama’s decision to nominate current CIA Director Leon Panetta as Secretary of Defense, Gen. Petraeus as Director of the CIA, General John Allen, Commander of US Forces in Afghanistan and Ryan Crocker, Ambassador to Afghanistan.

"Secretary Gates has done a tremendous job and his leadership will missed. Replacing him will not be easy, but Leon Panetta has the professionalism, knowledge and support to step in and do a tremendous job. As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I worked closely with Leon Panetta and his team. He did a great job as Director of the CIA and I am confident he has the skills and know-how to do a great job as Secretary of Defense.

“I have also worked closely with General Petraeus in my capacity on the House Armed Services Committee. He has shown strong leadership in a number of high level national security positions and I have no doubt that he will continue that effective leadership as Director of the CIA.

"The additional nominations of General John Allen to Commander of US Forces in Afghanistan and Ryan Crocker to Ambassador to Afghanistan will add two more respected and seasoned leaders to the President's national security team.

"Together these four nominations will bring together a strong team of experienced leaders and I look forward to working with them as we continue to address the significant national security challenges our country faces today.”

VA Supreme Court Rules Payday Lenders Made 9.2 Million Illegal Loans

Payday loan companies have a history of prying on the poor to rake enormous profits setting up their customers to fall into severe debt. So many Virginians had fallen victim to the predatory practices used by the payday loan industry that there have been several attempts to reform the industry, though there is still some progress that needs to be made. Part of those reforms included a provision that required a waiting period of at least one day after a customer pays off a loan before they can receive another loan from the same payday lender. Those provisions have helped in some circumstances, but the payday lenders are still doing whatever they can to bend the rules.

This can be seen through a Virginia Supreme Court ruling issued last week in Ruby v Cashnet INC that says when a payday lender “makes a loan to a borrower immediately after the borrower repays in full a previous loan,” it’s a violation of the 2002 Virginia Payday Loan Act. According to Virginia Partnership to Encourage Responsible lending (VaPERL), that means Virginia payday lenders made an estimated 9.2 million illegal loans between 2002 and 2009. To help realize the extent of what’s at stake, it’s important to note that this isn’t 9.2 million dollars in loans, but 9.2 million loans.

VaPERL suggests that the Supreme Court decision is also important because it exposes yet another example how predatory lenders mislead borrowers and the public. For example, payday lenders and other predatory lenders market their loans as “a short-term loan to meet a financial emergency” but the high court had a better description of these loans: “…a vicious cycle of debt.”

What this all means is that legislators have tried to simply reform some of the regulations on the payday lenders and that’s brought some small success, but the high court’s decision illustrates how the General Assembly should revisit the issue. The 9.2 million loans that are deemed to be illegal are how this ruling shows that predatory lenders cannot be expected to follow the law when “reform” measures are passed. Dana Wiggins from VaPERL therefore pointed out what he believes to be how the GA should address the issue when he said “the only way to effectively regulate predatory lending is to return to interest rate caps that worked well before the General Assembly started creating all these exceptions for payday lenders and others.

Justice Stephen Breyer Wishes Supreme Court Could Fight Gerrymandering

As there are battles here in Virginia and across the country over redistricting, I thought it was worth looking at some comments that Justice Stephen Breyer made last year when he was on C-Span discussing his book, Making Our Democracy Work: A Judge’s View. When asked if there was a case he would like to revisit, Breyer says he would like to take on gerrymandering. He went on to say that we need fair districts in order for our democracy to function fully and that the current system causes some people to be jaded because certain districts are drawn to protect one party or the other.

Harry Reid Will Bring Ryan Budget Up for a Vote

As Congress is finishing up a two week district work period, House Republicans have been forced to defend their votes for Ryan budget during town hall meetings. They were getting so much heat that the Republican caucus even held an emergency conference call to go over how they should respond to their critics. Realizing that this represents an opportunity to put the Republicans on the record regarding the Ryan budget, Harry Reid told reporters that he will be bringing the Ryan budget up for a vote in the Senate. Here’s what Sam Stein had to say about the conference call.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) announced on Wednesday that he would host a vote on Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-Wis.) budget as a means of forcing moderate GOP senators to weigh in on the legislation’s controversial proposals. He did not provide a specific date for when that vote will take place.

“There will be an opportunity in the Senate to vote on the Ryan budget to see if Republican senators like the Ryan budget as much as the House did,” Reid said on a conference call with reporters. “Without going into the Ryan budget we will see how much the Republicans like it here in the Senate.”

Reid, who had been traveling with other senator’s in China, accused the Ryan plan of fundamentally changing Medicare and burdening health care consumers with uncertainty and higher costs. By holding a vote on the bill—which his own party will vote against en masse—the majority leader is hoping to not only drive a wedge within the GOP but keep the Ryan budget in the news.

With outside groups already been launching ads against vulnerable Republicans who voted for Ryan’s budget, it’s safe to assume that the same could happen to Senators who voted for the bill. Reid’s decision to bring the Ryan budget up for a vote is a very smart move politically. Since there are some rumors of division among the GOP in their support for the extreme measures found in Ryan’s budget, forcing the moderate Republicans in the Senate to vote on the measure could also further divisions within the GOP.

While the vote could make an uncomfortable situation for Republicans in the Senate, it’s still unlikely to actually pass. With the public opposition to the proposal already increasing every day, however, this measure would keep the GOP’s cut to programs like Medicare in the news. This could be very important in the coming weeks because I've heard that the Gang of 6 will have some trouble gaining support for the proposals it comes up with. Instead of the press focusing on how the group trying to come up with a moderate proposal is in danger of becoming irrelevant, having the Senate on the Ryan budget is therefore a way to keep the story on the extreme measures proposed by the GOP instead of the lack of an alternative that could pass both chambers.

With all that being said, it looks like Congress is struggling to get a budget. So if balancing budgets one of your strengths, check out online accounting degrees so you can have the qualified degree when you put your voice forward.

ICYMI, Some Quick Must Reads

In case you missed them over the last few days, here are some stories that are worth reading.

**Before Obama decided to release his long form birth certificate (which confirmed what he’s been saying all along), the big news today was going to be that there’s going to be some changes in Obama’s national security team. Current CIA Director Leon Panetta will replace Robert Gates as secretary of defense, General David Petraeus will become the new CIA Director, and Ryan Crocker will become Ambassador to Afghanistan.

**George Allen said he supports Ryan’s Tea Party budget plan. As we’ve already seen that Virginians don’t support the drastic cuts to Medicare and other crucial programs, the DPVA Communications Director Brian Coy quickly highlighted how “the plan makes drastic cuts to investments that create opportunity for working families, and weakens essential safety nets – like Medicare – for seniors, people with disabilities and those who have lost their jobs.” He continued by highlighting how “despite all of this, the Republican budget still won't solve our financial problems. In fact, it threatens to make them worse by endangering the progress we've made to stabilize our economy and create jobs. Virginians need smart fiscal leadership to cut spending and keep our economy growing. We don’t need another six years of George Allen’s fiscal irresponsibility.”

**In an example of why the LGBT community hasn’t been thrilled with the Obama Administration, Attorney General Eric Holder praised the lawyer who resigned from his law firm because the firm decided not to help John Boehner defend the Defense of Marriage Act. In other words, just as folks were praising the Obama Administration’s decision not to defend a policy that blatantly discriminates against same sex couples, Eric Holder is slapping the LGBT community in the fact by actually commending someone who is protesting opposition to the law.

**There are a lot of questions about the tactics colleges use to claim they have opportunities for women to compete in athletic programs. The New York Times even highlighted how some universities even count even have men who are the practice teams for women’s sports so that they can have a higher number of women athletes in reports they have to submit to the Department of Education.

How Do Gerry Connolly's Fundraising Numbers Compare to Other "Vulnerable" Candidates?

After a close reelection campaign last year, Gerry Connolly started off 2011 by putting together some good fundraising numbers. A chart released by Roll call that highlighted fundraising numbers for House members who "won with less than 55 percent of the vote in 2010, are considered vulnerable by either party, or both,” showed that Gerry had raised $345,000 during the first quarter and had $303,000 cash on hand.

Since the chart prepared by Roll Call focused on what could be some of the closest races during the next election, I thought it was worth doing a little analysis of the numbers to see how Gerry’s numbers compare to those reported by others on the list. Here are some of the stats I came up with:

• Of the 119 members who made it onto the list, 64 were Republicans and 55 were Democrats.
• Of those on the list, the average amount raised was $190,848.74 and the average cash on hand was $264,840.34.
• 29 of those members on the list raised less than $100,000 during the first quarter
• Only 21 members on the list (10 Republicans and 11 Democrats) ended the quarter with more cash on hand that Gerry.
• Only 10 members on the list actually raised more money than Gerry. Of those 10, only 8 ended the quarter with more cash on hand.

It’s also worth noting that Michele Bachmann was the only one on the list who raised more than a million dollars (she raised $1.748 million and has $2.832 million COH). Much of that was because she has become the darling of the Tea Party and is considering a presidential campaign. Since the funds in her Congressional campaign’s account could be transferred to a presidential campaign, these funds are likely a result of people donating to express their support for her potential presidential bid. Besides Bachmann, only Frank Pallone (D-NJ) and Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) had more than a million dollars in their campaign accounts at the end of the first quarter.

What this all means is that when compared to the other potentially vulnerable candidates, Gerry’s fundraising numbers were much better than his cash on hand numbers. This makes sense because a close race is going to drain the campaign coffers no matter where the race is held. When you combine this with the fact that the Northern Virginia media markets are some of the most expensive in the country and Gerry’s race was so close in 2010, it shouldn’t be surprising that there wasn’t much money left in Gerry’s campaign account. The fact that the donations are already flowing in quickly this early in the 2012 cycle shows that donors are energized about keeping Gerry Connolly in Congress. These strong numbers can only help as the campaign advances.

Supreme Court Refuses Cuccinelli's Request to Fast Track Challenge to Health Care Law

While it shouldn’t be too surprising to anyone familiar with Virginia politics, Ken Cuccinelli has been trying to use his position as Virginia’s Attorney General to win some political points with his base. Not only has he been advocating against allowing loving same sex couples to adopt children, but he’s also been spending tax payer money to challenge health care reform. As part of his desire to see affordable health care coverage prevented as quickly as possible, he had even requested that the Supreme Court allow his challenge to the law head directly to the highest court instead of going through the normal appeals process. Fortunately, the Supreme Court announced it wouldn’t be granting Cuccinelli’s request.

The Supreme Court on Monday turned down Virginia’s request that it rule immediately on the constitutionality of the nation’s health-care overhaul.

The decision to reject Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II’s request for expedited review, announced routinely without elaboration or noted dissent, is not surprising. The court rarely takes up issues that have not received a full review in the nation’s appeals courts.

This decision has already received a lot of praise from both local and national officials. DPVA Chairman Brian Moran, for instance, quickly put out a statement praising the decision and encouraging Cuccinelli to devote more of his office’s resources to fighting for Virginians who are struggling in this economy.

The Supreme Court did the right thing in requiring our litigious Attorney General to pursue his personal crusade against health reform through the proper legal channels. It is unfortunate, however, that this ruling all but ensures that this issue will continue to distract Ken Cuccinelli from more important issues for the foreseeable future.

Instead of using his taxpayer-funded office to challenge a law that has already helped more than 100,000 young Virginians keep their access to health insurance, the Attorney General should devote more of his time and our resources to fighting for middle class families that are struggling to find work and stay in their homes in this difficult economy. Virginians should not have to foot the bill for his personal political agenda.

It should also be noted that even though this is a victory for those who support providing affordable health care to the public, the court battle over health care reform is far from over. As Moran pointed out, for instance, Cuccinelli’s crusade against health care reform isn’t even over as the case now will just be following the normal appeals process. When you combine that with the fact that some other states are pursuing cases against the law, it looks like we’ll be seeing some Republican leaders trying to play politics with health care for quite some time.

RIP Bruce Jamerson

We've seen some bitter partisan battles recently here in Virginia, but politicians and activists from both sides of the aisle have come together to express their sorrow over the passing of Bruce Jamerson. Bruce, who served as the clerk of the Virginia House of Delegates for years, passed away under sad circumstances earlier this week.

Although I didn't know him well, I had the honor of meeting him several times during trips I've made to Richmond over the years and he was always extremely pleasant to interact with and showed a clear passion for the work he did with the House. I first met Bruce during my senior year at GMU when I was down in Richmond visiting legislators during a citizen lobby day event. I had just started a job as an organizer for a progressive nonprofit at the time and when I brought up that I was about to graduate with a degree in history, he became extremely eager to talk about the long history of the House of Delegates and what it meant to modern day politics.

Based upon what other folks have been saying both on the floor of the House and in the Virginia political community, I'm definitely not the only one who believes he will be missed.

GOP's Defense of DOMA is Running Into Problems

The Republicans gained control of the House of Representatives in last year’s elections because they insisted that they would focus on job creation. Since taking control of the House, however, it’s been established that they are spending a lot of time focusing on social issues. One of those issues is same sex marriage, which they decided to take on as an issue after the Obama Administration said the DoJ would no longer be defending it because they believe the law to be unconstitutional. In other words, the House Republicans are focusing on social issues instead of jobs and will be spending money during these tough economic times to defend a law that takes rights away from people.

That decision, and how they’re handling the situation, has caused the GOP to run into a few roadblocks. In a recent hearing of the Judicial Committee’s subcommittee on the Constitution, for instance, the Republicans got a lot of heat for having Maggie Gallagher testify about DOMA but refusing to even extend an invitation to the Department of Justice. Since the entire hearing was supposed to be about how the DoJ will no longer be defending DOMA, this decision appeared to be very odd since you’d think anyone wanting the full story would want the DoJ there. As Rep. John Conyers pointed out during the hearing, anyone who has been following the situation is painfully aware that the GOP is just playing political games with people’s basic civil rights.

So as the Obama Administration has said it won’t spend money to continue stripping people of their rights and the GOP was caught playing political games at a hearing, Boehner was probably hoping defending DOMA he wouldn’t cause him any more problems. Nonetheless, he ran into some more issues yesterday as the law firm he was using to take up the defense has decided to drop the case. The firm’s Chairman, Robert D. Hays, Jr., had the following to say about the decision.

Today the firm filed a motion to withdraw from its engagement to represent the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the House of Representatives on the constitutional issues regarding Section III of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act. Last week we worked diligently through the process required for withdrawal.

In reviewing this assignment further, I determined that the process used for vetting this engagement was inadequate. Ultimately I am responsible for any mistakes that occurred and apologize for the challenges this may have created.

The GOP is maintaining that they should continue defending the law because Obama’s decision supposedly goes against tradition and the constitution. As Steny Hoyer said when he announced his opposition to Congress defending the law, however, “ there have been over 50 instances [since 1979] in which both Democratic and Republican Administrations have declined to defend acts of Congress.” What this ultimately means is that they are spreading mistruths about why the Obama Administration was wrong in a desperate attempt to hide the fact that they’re simply spending money in an attempt to push their own social agenda on other people. For a party that told the American people it would focus on job creation, these actions are a prime example of how the leaders of the GOP are going back on their promises.

Tibetans Still Being Attacked By Chinese

For a lot of Americans, the Free Tibet movement is something that they know is somehow connected to the Dalai Lama. Some might even understand that Tibetans living in their homeland have had their rights deeply restricted and aren't even allowed to mention the name of their spiritual and rightful civil leader. What most don't understand, however, is that the Chinese government still uses a severe amount of force when dealing with Buddhist monks and the Tibetan people.

Chinese security forces have detained more than 300 Tibetan monks at a besieged monastery in Sichuan, taking them away in buses and brutally beating local Tibetans who attempted to come to their rescue, exile Tibetan sources said.

Two of those attacked—an elderly man and woman—were killed, sources said.

The monks at Kirti monastery in the Ngaba Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture had resisted a forced campaign of “political re-education” following the March 17 self-immolation death of a monk protesting Beijing’s rule in the area.

In addition to the human rights violations that should obviously concern everyone, this is one of the circumstances where China holding much of our debt is cause for some concern. After all, it's hard for the US to take a firm stance on the issue when we owe the Chinese so much money and we're desperately trying to get them to change some policies about the value of their currency.

Gerry Connolly Discusses Spending and the Budget on Washington Journal

Rep. Gerry Connolly was the guest on Washington Journal and discussed the budget and spending issues. As you can see from the video below, the interview was rather long and in depth which allowed them to get into some really good discussions. They started, for instance, by highlighting how 73 percent of the constituents participating in the poll conducted during Gerry's recent telephone town hall meeting (which had 30,000 people participating) said they don’t support the Republican plan to eliminate the current Medicare program that provides health care for all seniors and replace it with vouchers that would help seniors pay part of their cost of purchasing private health insurance.

Another big point was that one caller asked about why we should actually raise the debt ceiling. In addition to pointing out how not doing so could lead to us going into default and have a devastating impact on our economy, Gerry highlighted how the founding fathers (with Alexander Hamilton as Washington's Treasury Secretary) actually worked hard to establish the US as credit worthy. The obvious implication of this is that not raising the debt ceiling would cause us to take action that goes against what our founding fathers envisioned. I thought this was interesting because the GOP really likes to claim they're continuing the work of the founding fathers, but they are actually the ones right now who are considering policies that would contradict the founding fathers.

Also, when Gerry was asked about the Ryan Budget proposal, he had similar comments to what he said right after it passed. He said it was a "radical document" that was not in the best interests of the American people. Instead of trying to take a balanced approach to many of our budget issues, Gerry highlighted how it allowed tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires at the same time that crucial programs were being severely slashed.

Photos and Reaction to Democratic Press Conference on GOP's Budget

After the GOP budget passed last week, several Democratic members of the House Budget Committee came out to speak to the press. Although even some of the speakers highlighted how this budget is dead on arrival in the Senate, they wanted to take a moment to highlight some of the extreme measures that can be found in the Republican budget. It’s worth noting that Rep. Chris Van Hollen focused on how debate isn’t about “whether or not we should work together on reducing our deficits and the debt, but how we do that.” This important because the extreme measures in the GOP budget are why he also said the Democrats “believe the Republican budget makes the wrong choice for America.”

Quickly turning to why he thought the GOP budget was the “wrong choice,” Van Hollen highlighted how it would hurt the fragile economic recovery by keeping tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires at the same time that it would slash investments in education and force seniors to be at the whims of the private insurance industry by ending the medicare guarantee. The Democrats on the budget committee aren’t the only ones who spoke out about the harmful cuts to medicare.

Gerry Connolly expressed many of the same ideas of those at the press conference by saying that he “could not support the Republican majority’s draconian budget plan that would destroy the Medicare program and break faith with our seniors.” He then added that “denying and rationing medical care for seniors, increasing out-of-pocket costs for medical services and prescription drugs, and putting the fate of our seniors in the hands of the private insurance companies do not represent my values or the values of most Virginians or Americans.”

The Democrats also quickly highlighted how the Republicans are having some difficulty trying to defend their budget. Rep. John Yarmuth, for instance, claimed the GOP’s proposal wasn’t “a reality based budget” and that their argument that tax cuts to the rich would spur growth is a myth that only the Heritage Foundation would support. There was also the myth the cuts wouldn’t impact anyone over the age of 55. As Rep. Kathy Castor pointed out, this is simply incorrect because medicare providers won’t have much incentive to stay in the program if they know it’s going to be ending soon. When you combine this with the fact that there are going to be major cuts to nursing homes, this could make it extremely difficult for seniors to get the care that they need.

In a sign of how some of the false arguments that the GOP used during the debate, Van Hollen also drew attention to one argument that also illustrated the hypocrisy of some GOP leaders. During the early stages of the debate, some of the Republicans claimed they were essentially turning medicare into a program that resembles what Members of Congress receive. This is simply untrue because Members of Congress receive what’s called a fair share payment, which covers a certain percentage of their health care coverage. This means their payment is directly proportional to the overall cost of their coverage. In other words, their costs won’t skyrocket if the costs of health care increases. With the way the GOP budget is set up, that wouldn’t happen with the medicare program because seniors would just receive a flat payment amount. As a result, seniors would have to pay more for health care on a limited income if the private insurance companies decide they want more profits.

Van Hollen pointed out that this is rather hypocritical because it’s asking seniors to be at the whims of private insurance companies while Members of Congress aren’t going to worry about increasing costs. On top of that, they’re giving some of their corporate and wealthy allies a big break by refusing to restore the tax rates to what they were during the Clinton era – a time when we had balanced budgets and a strong economy. And that is why the Democrats are correct in pointing out that the GOP budget is “the wrong choice for America.”

Photos from Hearing on Chinese Cyber Attacks

Here are some of the photos I shot during a hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee's subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. The topic of discussion was “Communist Chinese Cyber-Attacks, Cyber-Espionage and Theft of American Technology.”

Photos from House Hearing on DOMA

The following are photos I shot during a recent hearing in the House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on the Constitution on "Defending Marriage." The purpose of the hearing was supposedly to examine the Obama Administration's decision not to defend DOMA in court. I'll have more to come on the hearing, but I hope you enjoy these shots.

Wasserman Schultz Wants to Close Gun Show Loophole

There’s been an effort in Virginia for several years to close the gun show loophole, but the gun lobby has been able to use money and lobbying efforts from preventing the measure from being passed. As a result, there are many criminals who might be able to get their hands on a weapon because a background check isn’t required during “private” sales. In light of the recent gun tragedies like the shooting earlier this year in Tuscon, however, we’ve now seen some national leaders taking the lead on closing the gun show loophole.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who is a good friend of Gabby Giffords, will be introducing legislation in the House of Representatives that will require a background check on all gun sales.

"It is outrageous that gun buyers evade the background-check system every day, even in broad daylight," Wasserman Schultz said Monday at a gun-reform rally in Miami sponsored by Mayors Against Illegal Guns.

"While we likely cannot end all gun violence, we certainly can do much, much better," she added. "We have laws on the books designed to keep guns out of the hands of those that should not have them. We just need to close the loopholes and improve the information available to law enforcement."

Although there have been some politicians who called for stricter gun control laws after events like the tragedy at Virginia Tech, the fact that Wasserman Schultz is the one sponsoring the legislation is important to note. Not only has she been a rising star in the Democratic Party in recent years, but she’s also the new head of the DNC. This means that any legislation that she’s actively working on will likely receive a lot of attention. When you combine this with the fact that Chuck Schumer is introducing companion legislation in the Senate and President Obama has advocated for an “instant, accurate, comprehensive and consistent system for background checks,” there is the real possibility of legitimate action on the issue.

Despite the hope for some concrete action, however, there’s no doubt that the NRA will be able to dump millions into lobbying against the legislation. At the same time, there are many groups who simply want to make people aware of the gun show loophole who are running into problems. A group just outside of Chicago, for instance, received a lot of resistance from the owner of the building where the show will be held. According to a report from the Chicago Tribune, the owner ''prohibited the group from entering the show, threatened them with prosecution and suggested that (if they chose to ignore this warning) he could not vouch for their safety.''

In other words, the legislation being introduced represents a step in the right direction but clearly doesn’t mean the fight is over.

Forbes: Now Gov. Scott Walker Wants to Take Over Local Governments

As we're going through the budget debate, Republicans claim that they want smaller government and to focus on the economy. As we've seen them try to force a government shutdown over planned parenthood funding and invited Maggie Gallagher to testify last week about why same sex couples shouldn't be allowed to marry (more on this later), it's become apparent that the GOP leadership don't mind a big centralized government when it means they're able to impose their own agenda on the public.

A prime example of this can be seen in Wisconsin. When Gov. Walker rammed through legislation that would strip the public sector workers of their collective bargaining rights, he claimed he was just doing it because the unions were costing the state too much money. He still stuck to those claims after the unions granted him all the financial concessions he requested and literally hundreds of thousands of people came to Madison, Wisconsin to protest his decision. Now that he has already showed he doesn't care about the democratic process or the will of the people, Forbes is reporting that Walker is taking his actions a step forward by trying to take over localities that have financial policies he disagrees with.

Following the lead of Michigan GOP Governor Rick Snyder, Walker is said to be preparing a plan that would allow him to force local governments to submit to a financial stress test with an eye towards permitting the governor to take over municipalities that fail to meet with Walker’s approval.

According to the reports, should a locality’s financial position come up short, the Walker legislation would empower the governor to insert a financial manager of his choosing into local government with the ability to cancel union contracts, push aside duly elected local government officials and school board members and take control of Wisconsin cities and towns whenever he sees fit to do so.

Such a law would additionally give Walker unchallenged power to end municipal services of which he disapproves, including safety net assistance to those in need.

One would think all of the Tea Party activists would be up in arms about such a blatant power grab from Walker, but they are still standing by their man because he went after the supposedly evil unions. What this ultimately helps to illustrate is how Gov. Walker and his Tea Party supporters weren't interested in stripping workers of their rights for financial reasons. Instead, they did so in a drastic attempt to gain more power for themselves. Organized workers represented a threat to their political agenda and that was simply unacceptable in their opinion.

Since this power grab also highlights how Walker isn't done trying to impose a radical agenda, it also shows just how important the recall elections are of those Republican state senators who support Walkers agenda.

Gerry Connolly Votes For Budget Compromise

As the budget compromise headed to a vote in the House of Representatives today, there was a lot of buzz about how many Republicans would vote against the CR. Despite the constant talk about the divisions in the GOP caucus, however, there was never really any doubt that it’d pass the House because there were a number of Democrats who were likely going to vote in favor of the bill. As the bill passed on a vote 260-167 today, Gerry Connolly was one of the 89 Democrats who supported it.

Although he did speak out about some of the cuts to important programs contained in the CR, he said one of the main reasons he voted yea was the inclusion of $150 million in “desperately-needed funding for Metro capital improvements and transportation projects to deal with 22,000 new workers coming to Fort Belvoir due to BRAC.” This shouldn’t be too surprising because Gerry has been working since February to restore cuts to Metro that the GOP proposed.

In the Republicans’ original short-term budget bill (HR 1), the GOP eliminated the annual $150 million payment for Metro that is matched by $50 million each from Virginia, Maryland, and the District of Columbia.In an effort to save the funding, Connolly offered an amendment on the House floor, wrote to Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell urging him to weigh in with the entire Virginia congressional delegation, communicated the urgency of the matter with his Senate colleagues, and lobbied the White House and the House leadership to ensure the funding was included in the final compromise spending bill that came to the House floor today.

When the Republican budget plan came to the floor in mid-February, Connolly offered the amendment, supported by most of the Washington-area congressional delegation, to restore the annual $150 million payment to Metro. During debate on his amendment, Connolly argued that, “The effort by Republicans to eliminate the fiscal year 2011 federal payment to Metro is an egregious abrogation of the contract Congress made with Virginia, Maryland, and DC. It jeopardizes everything we’ve tried to do, in a bipartisan manner, to improve Metro safety.”

Since the funding was supposed to match the funds donated by Virginia and other local states, Connolly decided to put some pressure on the GOP by writing Governor McDonnell and urging him to use his relationships with Republican leaders to restore the federal funding. Although it took him some time and public pressure, McDonnell eventually followed Gerry’s lead for standing up against the cuts and wrote a letter to the Republican Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission, and the Virginia delegation in support of the funding. McDonnell also raised Connolly’s concerns at a March meeting he held on Capitol Hill with the entire Virginia delegation.

Even though the cuts would have a devastating impact on the economy in Northern Virginia and the ability of people to get to work (including members of the federal workforce), the GOP’s leadership refused to listen and the funding wasn’t included in the GOP’s CR. Considering how the GOP wasn’t showing any interest in honoring federal commitments, the budget compromise represented a rare opportunity to make sure the funding was actually in place. That is why, despite all the drastic cuts to other crucial programs, Gerry’s vote on the CR is one that even opponents of the compromise should understand.

Sen. Jeff Merkley Introduced Fully Inclusive ENDA

Throughout my time as an organizer and blogger, I’ve always been amazed at how there are some people who oppose basic civil rights for all. While I can see where opponents of gay marriage are coming from (though I vigorously disagree with them), it simply doesn’t make sense to me when I hear people suggest that it’s alright to deny employment to someone just because of their sexual orientation. That is why I was extremely happy to see that Sen. Jeff Merkley is once again trying to end discrimination based upon sexual orientation and gender identity in the workplace by introducing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA).

The legislation would prohibit employers, employment agencies, labor organizations and joint labor-management committees from firing, refusing to hire, or discriminating against those employed or seeking employment, on the basis of their perceived or actual sexual orientation or gender identity. Such protections are already in place prohibiting discrimination based on race, religion, gender, national origin, age, and disability.

“The right to work hard and earn a living is a fundamental right. It is essential to the success of a family. It is essential to the pursuit of happiness. It is part of equality under the law,” Senator Merkley said. “The test of whether you can get and hold a job should be whether you can do the job, not your sexual orientation or gender identity. I’m proud to join Senators Kirk, Harkin, and Collins to introduce the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and take an important step in the march towards equality.”

As you probably already know, various versions have been previously considered by Congress and some have even been passed by the House. The plain and simple fact that we’re once again seeing the legislation introduced, however, shows how we haven’t seen an end to workplace discrimination signed into law. In fact, some of the previous debate surrounding ENDA have caused some internal divisions in the LGBT community as people like Barney Frank and HRC’s Joe Solmonese claimed a fully inclusive ENDA couldn’t pass and therefore decided to sell out the transgender community by dropping gender identity from the bill.

Not too surprisingly, this caused a lot of people to be extremely frustrated. The grassroots already had a testy relationship with HRC and the organization’s willingness to ignore a group of people it was supposed to be standing up for was simply the final straw. Donna Rose, the first transgender member of HRC’s board, even resigned her position out of protest.

"Less than a month ago, HRC President Joe Solmonese stood before almost 900 transgender people at the Southern Comfort Conference in Atlanta to pledge ongoing support and solidarity," said Rose, in a statement released to the media Oct. 3. "In his keynote address, he indicated that not only would HRC support only a fully inclusive ENDA, but that it would actively oppose anything less. That single pledge changed hearts and minds that day, and the ripple effect throughout the transgender community was that we finally were one single GLBT community working together. Sadly, recent events indicate that those promises were hollow."

Those who were upset by this move were correct to express their outrage. The whole purpose of ENDA is to end discrimination in the workplace and it was simply wrong to sell out any portion of the LGBT community. That is why I was extremely pleased to see that Merkley’s version of ENDA is fully inclusive.

As there’s growing support for a fully inclusive ENDA, we’re also seeing a lot of support for the policy from the business community. This can be seen by how more than 85 percent of Fortune 500 companies already extend workplace protections based on sexual orientation and more than one-third on the basis of gender identity. Furthermore, several businesses expressed specific support for the legislation that Merkley has introduced.

“Nike stands with Senator Merkley and the other co-sponsors toward the reintroduction and passage of a fully inclusive ENDA bill,” said Nike U.S. Director of Government and Public Affair Orson C. Porter. “At Nike, we firmly believe that diversity drives innovation, which is a cornerstone of our business. Although more and more businesses in the U.S. have implemented policies that address workplace fairness for LGBT employees – the nation still needs a federal standard that treats all employees equal. Now is the time to do the right thing and pass ENDA into law.”

“At Sara Lee, we operate in a multi-cultural marketplace,” said Sara Lee Vice President of Diversity and Inclusion Mark Demich. “Therefore, we believe that having a workforce comprised of people from different backgrounds and life perspectives can lead to better customer and consumer insights, greater innovation and a more inclusive environment for our employees. Such an inclusive environment embodies who we are. In fact, Be Inclusive is one of our core values. Therefore, we strive to create and sustain a culture of inclusion and a workplace that is fair, equitable and free from discrimination. We strongly support the Employment Non-Discrimination Act that outlaws discriminatory practices based upon sexual orientation and gender identity. And we thank Illinois Senator Mark Kirk for signing on as a co-sponsor.”

Despite the support from the business community and the fact that the bill stands up for basic equality, it looks like there will be some difficulties getting the bill through Congress. When similar legislation was introduced in the House of Representative a few weeks ago, for instance, there was about half the number of co-sponsors. There’s no doubt that this is directly related to the Republican takeover of the House. In other words, the party that gained the majority by claiming it’d focus on jobs is actively opposing legislation that would help ensure people won’t face discrimination in the job market.

Video: Gerry Connolly Goes After GOP's Attacks on Medicare

As our economy is still struggling to recover from the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression, the GOP has proposed a 2012 budget that could do some severe damage to the fragile economy. Among other things, the Republicans are channeling George W. Bush as they're trying to privatize Medicare and would cut Medicaid by $750 billion over the next decade. In other words, they are willing to leave the most vulnerable members of our community at the mercy of large insurance corporations in order to appease the Tea Party. That is simply unacceptable.

Fortunately, there are some folks in Congress who realize the devastating impact the GOP's plan would have on the country. Rep. Gerry Connolly, for instance, took to the floor of the House to highlight how the Republican budget is actually a "path to the past" and not to prosperity. It's also worth noting that Gerry is actually considered relatively moderate on fiscal issues, so it's not like he's some crazy leftist going after Republicans just for the sake of it. Instead, he's an advocate for passing a budget that takes steps to address our debt issues while also investing in programs that will help our community and the economy.

Hawaii Legislature Passes Transgender Workplace Protections

While we’ve seen some victories for the LGBT community recently, most of the activists I’ve spoken to are disappointed that we haven’t seen more movement. Perhaps the greatest frustration comes around the lack of progress at the federal level on the Employee Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA). What causes folks to get heated up is that we’ve even been seeing some supposedly liberal Members of Congress who refuse to suppose the legislation if it includes protections for gender identity.

Fortunately, we’re seeing some movement on workplace protections for the transgender community on the state level. The state senate in Hawaii just overwhelmingly passed HB 546 yesterday and will “prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity or expression as a public policy matter and specifically with regard to employment” if signed by Governor Neil Abercrombie (which I’m hearing it will be).

“The march towards full equality in the Aloha State continues,” said Alan Spector, Equality Hawaii Co-Chair. “Providing employment protections to transgender citizens in Hawaii is a victory for civil rights and equal treatment under the law for all residents of our great state.”

Hopefully Congress will soon be following Hawaii’s lead. In a time when we are standing up fighting for freedom across the globe, after all, we should also make sure to address the inequalities that can be found here at home.

Fantastic Northern Lights Video

Because every now and then we need a little break from the intense debates taking place in Congress, here's a video that I definitely thought was worth highlighting. In order to give you an idea of the preparation that went into giving us a glimpse of the northern lights, here's what its creator, Ole Christian Salomonsen, had to say about the video.

It is a timelapse video of the Northern Lights. All sequences are shot in or close to Tromsø in Northern Norway.

I have spent over 6months collecting footage for this, I have shot approx 50.000 stills to choose from in making this video. A goal for me has been to try to preserve the real-time speed of the northern lights, or come as close as possible, and present it the way I experienced it, instead of the northern lights just flashing over the sky in the blink of an eye. It may work on other time-lapse videos with fast moving clouds and sunsets etc, but with the northern lights in focus, it should be presented in it's true speed to reflect her beauty, imo. In the video I have put together a collection of slow moving auroras in the woods, over the mounatins, in the city, in the foreshore, reflected in the sea, with some of the most spectacular and strongest auroral outbreaks seen in many years. Included here is a coronal outbreak, in which I am particularly happy to present, since it is very difficult to get on stills, even worse on "film".

In The Land Of The Northern Lights from Ole Christian Salomonsen on Vimeo.

Major tip of the hat to John over at Americablog

Dear Democrats, Please Don't Concede GOP Talking Points

While it's only been a few days since we almost saw a government shutdown, both sides are already gearing up for battles over the 2012 budget and raising the debt ceiling. Over the weekend, for instance, it was reported that President Obama will be speaking directly to the American people on Wednesday night during a nationally televised speech. The speech will touch on reducing the deficit and will discuss reforming entitlements such as medicare and medicaid.

Although the Republicans are the ones who generally are proposing huge cuts to programs, it appears as though Democratic leaders are also hinting at how they'll have to propose some cuts as well. The Democratic Whip in the House of Representatives, Steny Hoyer, for instance, released the following statement yesterday about Obama's upcoming speech.

"I'm pleased President Obama will be giving a speech this week to lay out a path of action to seriously address our nation's deficit. I strongly believe that reducing the deficit is critical to ensuring the long-term strength of our economy. Entitlement reform must be part of that effort, to ensure that Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are protected for seniors and working families, as well as strong for generations to come. This can only be done in a bipartisan way, and I hope Republicans work with us and put all options on the table. I support President Obama's focus on this issue, and stand ready to work with him."

While most people know that some reasonable cuts might be necessary in certain programs, it worries me that the Democrats are actively conceding some of the Republican talking points. We've already seen how Democrats compromised away the public option during the health care debate and actually went above and beyond what Boehner was originally proposing during last week's debate on the continuing resolution. These concessions were arguably forced because Democrats didn't take a stand in beginning of negotiations.

If we had started with single payer during the health care debate, for instance, we might have ended up with a compromise of the public option. And if we had turned last week's debate into a discussion on the importance of investing in our communities, we would have been able to prevent a lot more cuts. If you have some doubts about this, just look at what happened with planned parenthood. The discussion turned into one that highlighted the benefits of the organization and the cuts were prevented. Now imagine if Democrats had simply started out in the beginning of the debate standing up for Democratic values instead of immediately conceding GOP talking points.

Moran and Connolly Standing Up For Federal Workforce

While there's been a lot of discussion about which party would emerge as the big loser if there's a government shutdown, I think the big thing to remember is that the real people who'd lose out are federal workers. 800,000 people would be furloughed during a time when our country is still facing a tough recovery from the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression. That is why I'm glad to see that some members of the Virginia Congressional delegation are doing what they can to fight for the federal workforce.

While there was still some hope of preventing a government shutdown yesterday, Gerry Connolly sent a letter out to his colleagues reminding them of what's at stake -- literally thousands of jobs in almost every Congressional District. Then today Gerry signed on as a co-sponsor when Rep. Jim Moran introduced a bill (H.R. 1429) that would make sure all federal employees would be paid retroactively after the shutdown. Although the furloughed employees did get eventually get their pay after the last shutdown in the 90's, reports have made it clear that Congress would need to pass legislation making this happen.

"If the government shuts down, nearly a million federal employees will go without pay," Moran said in a statement. "Despite what happened in the mid-90s, I'm deeply concerned furloughed employees won't get retroactive pay. If we shut down, it won't be the federal employee's fault and they shouldn't be penalized for Congress' failure to act, particularly when members of Congress will continue to receive their pay."

Federal employees, including military service members, would not receive a paycheck during a shutdown. Those required to work during the hiatus (both military and civilian) would receive pay retroactively once funding is restored.The last time the government shut down in 1995 and 1996, for 27 days at an overall cost of $1.4 billion, furloughed federal employees were paid retroactively for the time they were off the job. But Congress must approve back pay for employees subject to furlough.

With about 100,000 federal employees in the DC area, it shouldn't be surprising that folks from Northern Virginia really want to see this passed. Even though there are federal workers throughout the country, however, the way the debate has been heading during the last few days suggests that this bill would actually be able to pass. That is why Moran, Connolly, and the other members who are standing up for the federal workforce need to be praised and deserve our support.

Gerry Connolly: Shutdown Will Impact Thousands of Workers in Every Congressional District

As it's beginning to look like we won't be able to avoid a government shutdown tomorrow, there's a lot of discussion about what will happen to people who work for the federal government. While John Boehner illustrated how he doesn't care about the federal workforce when he declared "so be it" if people lose their job, a government shutdown will directly impact the lives of thousands of people all across the country. That's because the 800,000 people who would be furloughed live in communities throughout the nation, not just in the DC area.

In order to remind his colleagues of how a shutdown would impact their constituents, Gerry Connolly sent a letter to them that provided "a list of federal employees by congressional district." The list, which can be seen here, illustrates how there's literally thousands of people in almost every district (and in many cases over 10,000) federal workers in each district. In my opinion, this directly goes after the Tea Party's argument that a shutdown would only impact beltway insiders. Instead, it will have an impact on everyday citizens who have simply decided to take a career in public service instead of what could have been a much more lucrative career in the private sector.

With that in mind, it's quite disturbing that the GOP's leadership is willing to play political games with the livelihoods of some many families. And Gerry hinted at this in his letter.

It is a shame that the federal workforce is being used as a pawn in this budget battle by a majority that refuses to compromise to keep our federal government functioning and providing important services to our citizens. Unfortunately, too many of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle seem to know the cost of everything, but the value of nothing.

A government shutdown could have very negative consequences at a time when the nation's economy is rebounding from the worst recession in 80 years. And, as you can see from the attached list, federal employees and their families in your district will feel the pain, just as families will in every congressional district across the nation.

Since some Republican House members from right here in Virginia have already said bring on the shutdown, I'm not too confident that the GOP will actually take into consideration how many people will be impacted by the shutdown. Hopefully Gerry's letter, however, will provide his Democratic colleagues with a reminder of exactly what's at stake as they're trying to prevent a shutdown.

IRS Commissioner Douglass Shulman Disucess Major Potential Changes to Tax System

Throughout the debate surrounding the budget, there has been a lot of discussion about how many of the cuts proposed by the GOP would actually have a very negative impact on our economy. A prime example of this comes in the form of the $603 million the Republicans want to cut from the IRS budget. While this might win some immediate political points with the public since it’ll reduce the proposed budget (and because everybody loves to hate the IRS), IRS Commissioner Douglass Shulman told the House Ways and Means Committee that the cuts would result in $4 billion in taxes not being collected. In other words, this proposed cut would actually cause the deficit to increase.

What this highlights is how we shouldn’t be simply trying to cut funding to programs, but instead trying to make them more efficient and cost effective. During a speech at the National Press Club yesterday, Shulman did just that as he spoke about how he wants “to look at the horizon” and make the tax collection process more efficient. Although this wouldn’t solve all the problems with the IRS, the Commissioner claims this could be done by identifying problems at the front end of the filing process instead of long after individuals have already filed their returns.

According to Shulman, one of the major problems with the way the system is currently set up is that the process they use to enforce compliance is focused too much on looking backwards. This is because they don’t get all of the paperwork on individual filers until after people have already done their taxes and, in many cases, collected some sort of return. This leads to many problems because the IRS has up to three years to run an audit on someone. And if they do find an error during the audit process, the delays often mean that people have already spent their refund and don’t have the money to repay the refund and/or the late fees and fines associated with the errors. As a result, this process can lead to some financial costs for the country as well as frustration and money problems for individual taxpayers.

If the IRS were to work with the private sector to make sure that they had access to people’s forms like W-2 and 1099 before individuals filed their returns, many of these problems could be solved. Shulman claimed that this change in when they received the forms would allow the IRS to immediately compare the tax returns to the records on file. As a result, they could immediately reject the filings instead of conducting a potentially expensive and time intensive audit down the road. He even compared this to how if there’s something wrong with your credit card (like if you miss a payment), you immediately get a call from the company. The point of the analogy was that having information available allows the credit card companies to act quickly in order to make sure they don’t lose money. It also means the consumer doesn’t rack up big fines without realizing something was wrong. Shulman claimed collecting W-2 and other similar forms up front would do the same thing with the IRS.

While he admitted there are some investments in technology necessary in order for these changes to be made, Shulman highlighted how over 70% of people are already e-filing. This is crucial because the data collection process needed for these changes would be much more efficient if it had the data coming in a digital format. Nonetheless, the changes are still down years down the line and there will need to be some conversations with leaders of payroll companies and other fields to talk about potential changes to when they would be required to file paperwork.

GOP House Members Want to Get Paid During Government Shutdown

A few weeks ago, I wrote a piece about how Jim Moran introduced legislation that would make sure Members of Congress didn't get paid during a government shutdown. The bill seemed like commonsense – if Congress was going to cause a government shutdown that would prevent federal workers to receive a paycheck, shouldn’t members of Congress share in the sacrifice. It would essentially be their inability to do their job that lead to the so many workers receiving a furlough after all. Apparently there are a number of Republicans in the House of Representatives, however, think they should be able to keep collecting a paycheck while the rest of the federal workforce suffers due to their refusal to compromise.

Although the Senate passed a companion bill that was introduced by Senator Boxer, the House has refused to actually pass Moran’s legislation. Want to know why? NBC did a little investigating and report that many Republican Members of Congress simply don’t want to part with a paycheck.

There are a variety of reasons, but one that is mentioned constantly is that many newer members of Congress quit their jobs to run for office.

Quite frankly, they say they need the money.

As freshman Rep. Sean Duffy (R-WI) told constituents last week: "I guarantee most of you, I have more debt than all of you. With six kids, I still pay off my student loans. I still pay my mortgage. I drive a used minivan. If you think I'm living high off the hog, I've got one paycheck. So I struggle to meet my bills right now."

If you were looking for a prime example of why people think Congress is out of touch with the public, Sean Duffy would probably be it. As he’s complaining about how he has to pay his bills, he’s raking in $174,000 a year. That’s about double what the average federal worker makes, but they’ll still have to pay their bills if they’re furloughed due to a federal government shutdown. As one senior Democratic aide put it in an email this afternoon, “What hypocrites!”

Video: Connolly Speaks on House Floor in Opposition to Dirty Air Act

Rep. Gerry Connolly spoke on the floor on the House of Representatives in opposition the HR 910. Gerry highlights here how the supporters of the "Dirty Air Act" are actively opposing scientific facts and sound policy in order to support a few large corporations who don't want their bottom line affected by necessary regulations.

Libya Discussed While General Carter Ham Testified Before Congress

There is still a lot of discussion about how Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle feel like they should be better informed about the action taking place in Libya and the plans moving forward. Although the Armed Services Committee hearing yesterday focused on the 2012 budget proposal, you can’t really have the leader of the US Africa command testify before the Armed Services committee without some discussion on the current situation on in Libya. General Carter Ham told the committee that US troops have moved into a support role, for instance, before adding that America still might launch a unilateral mission in some circumstances.

“There is always the potential for some U.S. unilateral military mission. One could think of, for example, personnel recovery of a downed pilot or something like that. If that were to occur, that would fall to U.S. Africa Command to execute those responsibilities.”

What was perhaps the most newsworthy aspect of Ham’s testimony, however, was that a lot of other countries in Africa were upset about the military action taken against Libya. This can be seen, for instance, in the reaction from people like the head of the African Union (Teodoro Obiang Nguema) who has actually come out in opposition to international action. He insisted that the situation was an internal Libyan problem. While many of the opposition leaders welcome the international support, they are also skeptical of the NATO forces claiming that they “don’t do anything.”

When it comes to a response to the international critics of our action in Libya, Gen. Ham said he needs “to have a very frank discussion about what U.S. Africa Command's role was and why we did what we did and just be as truthful and forthright as I can.” In other words, we need to continue engaging in the region and keep lines of communication open. With so many different revolutions taking place in Africa and the Middle East, this is definitely correct but it’s still not too comforting that we’re facing so much resistance. And that is part of the reason so many people are hesitant to fully support the way the Obama administration is handling the situation.

Rep. Buck McKeon appeared to share some hesitancy about the course of action we’re taking in Libya. In addition to having made comments about how he hopes Obama does a better job of keeping Congress informed, he hinted at how we don't appear to have an exit plan. When you consider that we're still in Afghanistan and Iraq years after Bush declared "mission accomplished," it was wise for McKeon to jump on this issue relatively early by using his opening statement to raise concern about how long we’re going to be staying in Libya.

"In AFRICOM’s area of responsibility, US forces have been conducting active military operations against forces loyal to Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi in an effort to prevent a massacre of the civilian population of Libya. Although this humanitarian intervention is motivated by a noble impulse, there is a strong possibility of a strategic stalemate emerging in Libya. I fear we may find ourselves committed to an open-ended obligation through our participation in NATO operations."

This is where Democrats actually agree with many members of the GOP. We might be simply in a supportive role right now as we’re enforcing a no fly zone and trying to protect the people of Libya, but even this type of action can only last for so long before the American people will increase their calls for an explanation of what our actual plans are and what success would look like. The Obama Administration has been doing a better job of informing Congress and the public about what's going on in recent days, but yesterday's hearing makes it clear that there are a lot of unanswered questions about how we can gain international support and paint a better picture of future plans in Libya.

Tim Kaine Announces Candidacy....finally

Ever since Jim Webb announced that he wouldn't be seeking re-election, the speculation has been that Tim Kaine would be running for the seat. Originally, he was supposed to announce either at or right before the JJ Dinner. That obviously didn't happen and ever since then I've been constantly hearing that the announcement would come "within a week." I'm not alone in hearing this from various sources and Lowell even laid out a timeline of the supposed announcement dates a couple of weeks ago over at Blue Virginia. Almost two months after the JJ Dinner, there was yet another story on CNN over the weekend that claimed "one source said Kaine's announcement will come in the next two weeks."

Since I'd heard similar reports before from high ranking members of the Democratic Party as well as Congressional staffers, I took the CNN story with a grain of salt. Almost everybody assumed that Kaine will run, so the press would eventually be correct if they continued saying the "announcement will come in the next two weeks." And with all the attention among political insiders talking about the race, it makes since that the media would want to keep reporting the rumors. Well, it turns out that CNN was correct and I received an email while I was on the Hill today that linked to a video announcing Kaine's candidacy.



When I told some of the reporters at the same table as me about the email, one of them responded by saying "it's about time." They also wanted to know if I thought Rep. Bobby Scott would still put his hat in the race. In other words, the reporters there weren't very excited about Kaine's announcement and were more interested in whether or not there would be a primary. When you consider that most of the media covering Congress is focused on the situation in Libya and the budget debate, Obama just announced his re-election campaign, and most people expected this announcement months ago, this was a pour way to roll out a Senate campaign if he wanted it to create a lot of energy about his candidacy. Fortunately for Kaine, he has some time before he really needs to truly begin energizing his base.

Video: Sen. Warner on the Budget

Sen. Mark Warner is one of the moderate senators has a lot of influence in the discussions surrounding the budget. That's why I think it's worth watching his appearance on State of the Union discussing the budget. It's also worth noting that Warner says he's hoping there won't be a government shutdown and suggests that both parties in Congress need to get to together and create a compromise.Since people like Rep. Scott Rigell have said they'd support a government shutdown if the Democrats don't agree to the Tea Party's proposals, it's safe to say that Warner and the other Democrats are taking a much different tone on the budget than Virginia's Republican members of Congress.

Gerry Connolly Wants St. Patrick's Day to be a Federal Holiday

Anyone involved in Virginia Democratic politics has probably heard Gerry Connolly joke about how he considers St. Patrick's Day to be the holiest day of the year. He even has one of his biggest fundraisers every year on St. Patty's day. With today being April Fools Day, it therefore shouldn't be too surprising that I received an email from some of Gerry's staffers highlighting a desire to see St. Patty's Day declared a federal holiday.

Here's the "press release" I received:

Connolly Introduces Important Legislation to Make St. Patrick’s Day Federal Holiday

Declaring enough is enough, Congressman Gerry Connolly today introduced The Irish-American Recognition and Respect Act to establish a federal holiday every March 17.

The bill directs the Office of Personnel and Management to establish March 17 as an official federal holiday in recognition of St. Patrick’s Day and of the tremendous contributions by Irish-Americans to the culture and economy of the United States.

“St. Patrick’s Day is the Holiest Day of the Year for me and thousands of fellow Irish-Americans,” said Connolly. “The idea that we’re all supposed to go to work and act as if it’s any other day is patently unfair.”

“Connolly is definitely on to something here,” said House Democratic Caucus Chairman John Larson.

St. Patrick’s Day is celebrated across the United States with parades, festivals, and the wearing of green clothing. In Boston, March 17 is the “Evacuation Day” holiday celebrating the departure of British troops from the city but widely celebrated as St. Patrick’s Day. Noting that St. Patrick’s Day is celebrated by the Irish and non-Irish alike, Connolly will be urging his colleagues in the House to sign on as co-sponsors to this common-sense legislation.

“Steny Hoyer is not Irish, but he has told me privately he wishes he was,” said Connolly. “I’m sure we can get him to support this bill.