This was a story that didn’t make the big media circuit outside of Minnesota, and didn’t even play large there. After all, this was the week in which allegations about same-sex sexual groping by Eric Massa were extended. What are a little fraud and violation of the separation of church and state, compared to that?

Republican Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, who is making all the moves of someone who wants to run for President in 2012, has been caught taking money from an account that was supposed to be dedicated to helping veterans. Pawlenty then gave the money to his favorite project the Minnesota bureau of big government religious programs, known euphemistically as the Office of Faith Based Initiatives. The money was gathered from fees for a “Support Our Troops” license plate.

Who would suspect that a “Support Our Troops” license plate would fund Onward Christian Soldiers? Tim Pawlenty, apparently. He sounds like a George W. Bush of the North.

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham and Democratic Senator Charles Schumer are planning to introduce legislation that would make biometric ID cards for all American workers. They would be mandatory.

Lindsey Graham says he doesn’t understand what the problem is. After all, he says, “We’ve all got Social Security cards!”

That reference should not make us feel better. When Social Security cards were introduced, Americans were told that the number would only be used for delivery of Social Security benefits and nothing else. Not for general identification, not to be required for any paperwork, not for your taxes, not for tracking purposes. Watch for the new assurances, assuredly to be eroded.

In a Senate Judiciary Committee meeting earlier today the disappointment on Dick Durbin’s face was unmistakable as he outlined the parameters of a deal on S. 1789, a bill that for months had been stalled in committee, a bill that until this week (see previous version here) would have eliminated the 100-to-1 sentencing disparity between the draconian crack cocaine laws and the relatively lax powder laws for powder cocaine:

What is my position? My position is for one-to-one equity and equality in sentencing. But in order to get things done, you have to be prepared to make mutual concessions, and that is what we have done. What we are going to propose to the committee today is to accept an amendment from Senator Sessions that sets the threshold for a five-year mandatory minimum at 28 grams, which is roughly the equivalent of one ounce. This would establish a crack-powder ratio of not 100-to-1 as in current law but 20-to-1… in exchange, Senator Sessions will agree to withhold his other amendments in relation to mandatory minimum sentencing and felony simple possession. We will all commit, in the course of this agreement, to oppose additional amendments to the bill and work to move this bill through the Senate on an expedited basis…. I know this agreement is not everything you would like. Frankly, it isn’t everything I would like either.

In exchange for lessening but preserving the inequality in sentencing between crack (a drug disproportionately used by poor people) and powder (a drug disproportionately used by rich people), Senator Jeff Sessions and the Republican caucus agreed not to filibuster the bill on the floor of the Senate or destroy it with poison-pill amendments. Senator Durbin and others in favor of equity (such as Senators Ben Cardin and Arlen Specter) were put in a position of accepting a lower level of discrimination or getting no improvement at all.

Senator Orrin Hatch displayed the intellectual depth of the obstructionist Republican group when he justified sentencing disparities for crack versus powder cocaine, citing a study showing rats exposed to cocaine were more violent than rats given heroin.

In America, you have to earn more money than it’s polite to whine about — $373,650 a year — in order to start paying a federal marginal tax rate of 35%. A person’s income between $34,000 and $82,400 a year is taxed at a rate of 25%.

According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, two-thirds of U.S. corporations don’t pay any taxes at all.

Republican Congressman Todd Tiahrt of Kansas has introduced a bill, H.R. 4781, to lower the top tax rate for corporations down to 22%. Under Tiahrt’s plan, a person earning $35,000 a year would end up in a higher tax bracket than a corporation earning $35 million.

Isn’t it nice to know someone on Capitol Hill is looking out for the big guy?

p.s. Just in case you were wondering, Tiahrt hasn’t introduced any bill to lower income tax rates for actual people.

As we’ve looked into the backroom dealings of members of Congress here at Irregular Times, we’ve seen a lot of shady dealings, but I can’t think of another special Washington D.C. arrangement so far this year that shows the chutzpah of special event put on by former U.S. Representative, and current U.S. Senate candidate, Pat Toomey tonight.

Toomey will be joined by John Thune, U.S. Senator from South Dakota, at 419 Constitution Avenue NE in Washington D.C. from 5:30 PM to 7:30 PM for a “Young Professionals Fundraising Reception”. What’s the big deal? For one thing, 419 Constitution Avenue NE is the address of the Lemunyon Group?, a lobbying firm.

As for the “young professionals” attending this fundraiser, you’ll see that the “hosts”, who are paying Toomey for the privilege of that title, are almost all of a particular variety:

Glenn LeMunyon
Anything but a young professional, Glenn LeMunyon is an old hand at DC political games, having served as an aide to U.S. Representative Tom DeLay, and currently making special deals as President of the lobbying firm hosting the soiree.

Cesar Conda
Another professional stretching the credibility of the word young, Cesar Conda started working in Washington D.C. as an aide to Republican Senator Bob Kasten way back in 1987. Conda worked on the profound failure of the 1996 Dole-Kemp presidential campaign, then went on to work for Senator Spencer Abraham and then Vice President Dick Cheney before leaving government to join the Executive Committee of a lobbying firm called DC Navigators.

Pat Raffaniello
Raffaniello started work back in the 1980s working for big oil companies and then for the NRA, before going to work as a Chief of Staff for Bill Brewster in Congress for four years. Since then, he’s been a lobbyist at three different lobbying firms, until he founded his own lobbying firm, Raffaniello & Associates, two years ago.

Drew Cantor
Mr. Cantor doesn’t fool around with non-profits. He lobbies for the US Chamber of Commerce, Allstate Insurance, the Committee on Capital Markets Regulation and the International Swaps and Derivatives Association. Smells like money!

Lawrence Willcox
Larry used to work for Senator John Kyl and the Senate Republican Policy Committee, but now works as a federally registered lobbyist at Capitol Tax Partners, where, as you can imagine, he is busy representing the needs of average Americans… along with clients such as tobacco giant Altria, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, GE, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, and the ever sparkling Clean Coal Solutions.

Bill Wichterman
This young whippersnapper has been a top aide in both the Senate and House of Representative, as well as serving as a special assistant to George W. Bush. For the last year, however, Wichterman has been a lobbyist with Covington & Burling.

Mathew Lapinski
Young Goodman Lapinski used to work with the lobbying firm of Jeffrey J. Kimbell & Associates. Presently, he is a Managing Director at the lobbying firm Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal, where much of his work is taken with the duty of “providing political intelligence services to clients throughout the financial services community.” Oh dear. Pat Toomey and Senator Thune wouldn’t be passing along any political intelligence to Mr. Lapinski tonight, would they?

Galen Roehl
Roehl has been working in Senator Sam Brownback’s office for 6 years now, but Brownback has said he’s not running for re-election. What will Roehl do next? A “young professionals” gathering is a great place to meet people looking for a brand new lobbyist!

Chris Singerling
Formerly the Political Director for top House Republican John Boehner, this genuine young fella is now working in the “Political Affairs Division” for Associated Builders and Contractors, running the association’s political action committee and supervising “grassroots efforts and regional political managers”. Hmmm. If you’ve got a paid political operative running working through regional political managers, how is his work grassroots?

Amy Smith
There are two Amy Smiths working as federal lobbyists. One works with Bartlett & Bendall, and the other works with Sanofi Pasteur. It’s not fair for me to guess which lobbyist this particular Amy Smith is, or even to presume that she is a lobbyist, the name Amy Smith is so common. I will note, however, that an Amy D. Smith – same middle initial as the current Bartlett & Bendall lobbyist – was a legislative assistant to Pat Toomey in 2000 and 2001. (Career tip: If your family name is Smith, Jones or Davis, you too can have a career as a stealthy political insider.)

Tonnie Wybensinger
Wybensinger is one of the few non-lobbyists hosting tonight’s Young Shills Reception. He used to work as a legislative assistant to Pat Toomey, but is now Chief of Staff for Blaine Luetkemeyer. Note to young lobbyists: Here’s a chance to get in some political influence on the side!

Pat Toomey’s campaign web site promises “A New Voice In Washington”. Which new voice would that be? The Goldman Sachs new voice or the International Swaps and Derivatives Association new voice?

The Oklahoma Hold Out is in its 208th hour.

The sit-in outside of Senator Tom Coburn’s office is drawing attention to Coburn’s hold on legislation to promote humanitarian and diplomatic relief to the onslaught of the Lord’s Resistance Army, a group of religious zealots who have unleashed brutal violence in Uganda and bordering countries. By declaring this hold, Coburn has stopped the legislation in its tracks despite its support by two-thirds of the Senate.

Coburn claims that his hold is all about budgetary discipline. But then bill sponsor Russ Feingold called his bluff, declaring that he would alter the legislation to stipulate the use of no new federal funds for the project. Coburn’s maintaining his hold… why?

This is the same Tom Coburn who voted for billions of dollars in oil subsidies in 2007.

Call Tom Coburn at 202-224-5754 and give him what for.

The U.S. Senators who blocked a six-month extension of unemployment insurance for jobless workers this week:

Lamar Alexander (R-TN)
John Barrasso (R-WY)
Robert Bennett (R-UT)
Jim Bunning (R-KY)
Richard Burr (R-NC)
Tom Coburn (R-OK)
Bob Corker (R-TN)
John Cornyn (R-TX)
Mike Crapo (R-ID)
Jim DeMint (R-SC)
John Ensign (R-NV)
Mike Enzi (R-WY)
Judd Gregg (R-NH)
Orrin Hatch (R-UT)
Mike Johanns (R-NE)
Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
Jim Risch (R-ID)
Jeff Sessions (R-AL)
John Thune (R-SD)

U.S. Senators rejecting an extension of unemployment insurance who also voted for billions of dollars in subsidies for the oil industry in December of 2007:

Lamar Alexander (R-TN)
John Barrasso (R-WY)
Robert Bennett (R-UT)
Jim Bunning (R-KY)
Richard Burr (R-NC)
Tom Coburn (R-OK)
Bob Corker (R-TN)
John Cornyn (R-TX)
Mike Crapo (R-ID)
Jim DeMint (R-SC)
John Ensign (R-NV)
Mike Enzi (R-WY)
Judd Gregg (R-NH)
Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
Jeff Sessions (R-AL)

U.S. Senators rejecting an extension of unemployment insurance who also voted to spend billions of dollars on the construction of new C-17 transport planes that the Defense Department says it neither wants nor needs:

Robert Bennett (R-UT)
Jim Bunning (R-KY)
Richard Burr (R-NC)
John Cornyn (R-TX)
Mike Crapo (R-ID)
Jim DeMint (R-SC)
Orrin Hatch (R-UT)
Mike Johanns (R-NE)
Jim Risch (R-ID)

U.S. Senators rejecting an extension of unemployment insurance who also voted to spend billions of dollars on F-22 fighter planes that fall apart, don’t fly in the rain, and were designed for dogfights with the Soviet Union:

Robert Bennett (R-UT)
Jim Bunning (R-KY)
Richard Burr (R-NC)
John Cornyn (R-TX)
Mike Crapo (R-ID)
Orrin Hatch (R-UT)
Mike Johanns (R-NE)
Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
Jim Risch (R-ID)
Jeff Sessions (R-AL)
John Thune (R-SD)

“I don’t feel stimulated. How about you?”

– Sarah Palin, populist of the people, flying in on a private jet and commanding a $75,000 speakers’ fee to share her words with the Republican Party of Arkansas. If that package doesn’t stimulate Sarah Palin, what will?

It’s been known for some time that the presidential administration of George W. Bush brought on lawyer John Yoo in order to write legal justifications for the U.S. Government to torture people it had detained. It’s less widely-observed but also known that John Yoo articulated the power of the President to nullify freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

And now comes something altogether new: page 64 of the Justice Department OPR (Office of Professional Responsibility) Report reveals that John Yoo asserted the power of the President to order the massacre of a village full of civilians [ellipses and bracketed comments are part of the original report, not added by Irregular Times]:

Yoo was asked to explain how the torture statute would interfere with the President’s war making abilities, and gave the following answers:

Q: I guess the question I’m raising is, does this particular law really affect the President’s war-making abilities…

A: Yes, certainly.

Q: What is your authority for that?

A: Because this is an option that the President might use in war.

Q: What about ordering a village of resistants to be massacred?… Is that a power that the President could legally –

A: Yeah. Although, let me say this. So, certainly that would fall within the Commander-in-Chief’s power over tactical decisions.

Q: To order a village of civilians to be [exterminated]?

A: Sure.

The Bush administration vigorously defended John Yoo as he asserted the president’s right to order torture, nullify free speech, obliterate the free press and, yes, massacre a village full of civilians.

The Obama administration has recommended that for his conduct, John Yoo should receive no punishment in criminal court, in civil court, or even by the Bar Association. This despite clear constitutional provisions and federal laws against such things. The constitution and the law just aren’t what they used to be.

And how has John Yoo reacted to his get-out-of-jail card from the Obama administration? With outrage, rolling out his lawyer to demand that the people who revealed John Yoo’s conduct should be disbarred and jailed.

Because torture, cancelling free speech, destroying a free press and massacring a village is all right… but revealing the truth about John Yoo and the Bush administration is simply unforgivable.

Do you have a nickel handy? Go ahead, pick it up. Hold it in your hand. Now imagine that for holding that nickel, you could be put into prison for 40 years.

For some years now, people have been pointing out the glaring disparity between prison sentences for powder cocaine and crack cocaine. If a person is caught possessing just 5 grams of crack cocaine, and if a prosecutor can convince a jury that the person might have wanted to give that crack to someone else, that person can be sentenced to 40 years in federal prison. 5 grams is the weight of a nickel. Thanks to the imbalanced drug sentencing laws, a person would have to be caught holding 100 times as much powder cocaine to get that same sentence. This disparity in sentencing reflects the crack scare of the 1980s, not current science: it turns out that crack cocaine is no more addictive than cocaine in its powder form.

There are bills out there, like S. 1789 in the Senate and H.R. 3245 in the House, which seek to eliminate the disparity by raising the amount of crack a person has to be carrying to trigger nearly life-long imprisonment. These bills are slowly, slowly making their way through Congress.

And then there’s the Republican version of equality. Congressman Roscoe Bartlett of Maryland proposes a new law, H.R. 18: the Powder-Crack Cocaine Penalty Equalization Act of 2009. The title makes it sound good, but read beyond the title and you’ll find out that equalization is not always a good thing. Instead of reducing sentences for possession of crack now that the uninformed hysteria of the 1980s has passed, Bartlett would reach equality by spreading the hysteria around. H.R. 18, if passed, would increase the sentence for possessing powder cocaine to the match the crazy-long sentences for people caught with crack.

I’m trying to figure out how this kind of policy translates into a campaign slogan for Roscoe Bartlett and his fellow Republicans who’ve signed on to this bill as cosponsors. How about $50 Billion for Prisons is Not Enough? Or maybe Prisoners Per Capita: Let’s Keep America On Top! There are so many possibilities; I’m sure that if Rep. Bartlett puts his mind to it he can come up with something really catchy.

Headlines blaze across the political sections of the Sunday papers this morning declaring the winner of the 2010 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) Straw Poll for the next presidential election contest. It’s important to know what the CPAC straw poll is in order to interpret it. The CPAC 2010 Straw Poll does not represent the wishes of rank-and-file Republican voters because rank-and-file Republican voters aren’t invited to vote in it. To vote, you have to pay dues and fees, travel to attend the conference, and be motivated and aware enough to actually cast a vote while in attendance. To win the CPAC 2010 Straw Poll, you have to not only be popular with conservatives but also be able to communicate with your supporters and effectively motivate them into action.

CPAC 2010 claims some 10,000 conservative activists attended their convention; of those some 2,395 attendees actually cast straw poll votes. Here is the final vote tally:

Ron Paul: 31%
Mitt Romney: 22%
Sarah Palin: 7%
Tim Pawlenty: 6%
Mike Pence: 5%
Newt Gingrich: 4%
Mike Huckabee: 4%

The other 21% of votes were cast for contenders who got 2% of the straw poll vote or less.

Ron Paul’s win is an indication of some serious organized strength among his supporters (a strength that dismayed many other CPAC 2010 attendees). It is not at all clear that the aging Ron Paul intends to run for President in 2012, but even if he does not run he could play a significant role as an candidate-maker within the economic libertarian wing of the Republican Party. Those within the Republican Party who cannot abide the occasional heterodoxy of Ron Paul may be giving his runner-up, Mitt Romney, a very close look, with their seats assuredly locked in an upright position.

On the other hand, the regular high-profile junkets and media appearances of Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich do not appear to have translated into the support of motivated, organized conservative activists. Should they be unhappy with the results of the straw poll? They should if the 2010 CPAC Straw Poll is a solid predictor of primary election success.

Can you guess the name of the candidate who came in 5th place in the 2007 CPAC Straw Poll? And can you guess what politician was overwhelmingly identified by respondents to the 2006 CPAC Straw Poll as the likely 2008 Democratic presidential nominee?

Republican politician Tom Ganley wanted very badly to buy himself a seat in the United States Senate this year. Ganley made a fortune as a car dealer, so he spent 1.6 million dollars on a primary campaign against former U.S. Representative Rob Portman. Ganley got to see himself on TV, and that was fun, but Portman had even more millions on hand than Ganley. Portman had taken lots of money from political action committees, including the following:

- American Insurance Company PAC
- American Bankers Association PAC
- American Gas Association PAC
- American Insurance Association PAC
- Blue Cross Blue Shield Association PAC
- Cardinal Health Inc. PAC
- Chevron Corporation PAC
- CitiGroup Inc. PAC
- Distilled Spirits Council of the USA PAC
- Duke Energy Corporation PAC
- ExxonMobil PAC

… you get the idea. In a contest of tremendous wealth against even more tremendous wealth, even more tremendous wealth won.

But what’s a poor millionaire like Tom Ganley to do? He can buy himself another political office, that’s what – just not so big.

Today, Tom Ganley announced that he’s agreed to let Rob Portman have the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate from Ohio, and will be running for U.S. House of Representatives against Democratic incumbent Betty Sutton instead.

Of course, there are already three Republicans running in that race. Never mind that. Tom Ganley saw an unfulfilled need – his own need for power and attention.

Tom Ganley for Whatever His Money Will Buy 2010!

The towns of Dublin and Westerville, Ohio are once-prosperous suburbs of Columbus, heavily reliant on the property taxes of well-to-do urban escapees and the service-sector jobs in its malls and shopping plazas. As property values slump and Ohioans stop shopping, the northern ring around Columbus finds itself slowly sinking. This is the demographic base for Republican Pat Tiberi in his 12th congressional district.

During this economic recession, which is hitting the civic infrastructure of central Ohio especially hard, Patrick Tiberi complains that Democrats haven’t done enough:

As more Ohioans lose their jobs, Democratic leaders in Congress are long past due to focus on creating jobs and getting Americans back to work…. As I’ve been saying our focus in Congress should be on creating an environment friendly to job-creation…. We need to focus on creating incentives for job creation.

What has Patrick Tiberi done in the 111th Congress to create jobs, to help get Americans back to work, to create incentives for job creation?

Nothing. Since he was last elected in November of 2008, Pat Tiberi has introduced five bills, none of which have been enacted into law. His most successful bill celebrates the 50th anniversary of an Antarctic treaty. Another of Tiberi’s bills, introduced last March, expresses support for the declaration of September as Brain Aneurysm Awareness Month. A third bill congratulates the Columbus Crew soccer team for winning a championship. Even if they had been passed, these three bills would accomplish nothing, having only symbolic effect as declarations.

A fourth bill introduced by Patrick Tiberi would have practical effect if passed — for the six members of the Cole family. Mary, Decontee, Emmanuel, Emmanuel Jr., Anna, and Yon Deh would be granted special immigration privileges to the United States if Tiberi’s bill passed. That’s nice for the Coles, but has no effect on anyone else. Then there’s Tiberi’s fifth and last bill introduced to the House of Representatives. H.R. 2642 is the only of Tiberi’s bills to have a general, substantive impact on all people — all anonymous dead people, that is. If H.R. 2642 passes, resources from the Department of Veterans Affairs would be redirected toward the effort of reviewing all unclaimed dead bodies to see if they are possibly those of veterans and therefore worthy of burial at Arlington National Cemetary.

As for the people who are living and breathing and voting and trying to find work in Dublin and Westerville? No, Pat Tiberi hasn’t figured out a bill for them yet. He’s been so busy criticizing Democrats for introducing the wrong bills that he just hasn’t had the time to come up with one of his own. Maybe he’ll come up with something in 2011. Maybe.

As F.G. indicated earlier today, self-avowed Republican presidential contender Sarah Palin has taken to the stage and the national airwaves, calling for a revolution. Her complete sentence:

I guess down here that’s some southern sweet tea, and you know up in Alaska, we have a smaller version of Tea Party up there, and we call it iced tea, and I am a big supporter of this movement, believe in this movement, got lots of friends and family in the lower 48 who attend these events and, across the country, just knowing that this is the movement, and America is ready for another revolution, and you are a part of this.

If Sarah Palin is calling for a revolution, the Tea Party Nation is paying her handsomely to do so. With Palin getting private air accomodations and $100,000 for her 40 minute and 20 second speech, she was paid at a rate of $41.32 per second. Sarah Palin was paid $1,033.06 just to share that beautiful thought you read above. But behind the scenes, Tea Party Nation is already rolling out the counter-revolution. The organization declares on its website that:

* it is a corporation which has trademarked the phrase “Tea Party Nation” and will sue anyone else who uses the words.

* “You can and will be banned for being a liberal.”

* “Tea Party Nation reserves the right to ban anyone for any reason we feel necessary”

* “Trashing of TPN will not be tolerated.”

* “Questions regarding TPN posted in the public forums or blogs on the site will be deleted.”

* “It is not a forum for… calls for militant uprisings.”

* “Tea Party Nation’s strict No Tolerance policy will not make exceptions… if you see such postings, you immediately report them”

While Tea Party Nation’s speakers call for a revolution for the cameras, any actual revolutionary behavior or dissent will be result in swift dismissal. That’s an interesting combination.