ted kennedy diagnosed with brain tumor

Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., has a malignant brain tumor, according to reports.

A cancerous brain tumor caused the seizure Sen. Edward M. Kennedy suffered over the weekend, doctors said Tuesday in a grim diagnosis for one of American politics' most enduring figures.

"He remains in good spirits and full of energy," the doctors for the 76-year-old Massachusetts Democrat said in a statement.

They said tests conducted after the seizure showed a tumor in Kennedy's left parietal lobe. Preliminary results from a biopsy of the brain identified the cause of the seizure as a malignant glioma, they said.

His treatment will be decided after more tests but the usual course includes combinations of radiation and chemotherapy.

Kennedy's Senate colleagues reacted with grief and worry for their friend.

“I want to take a moment to say how distraught and terribly shaken I am over the news of my dear friend, my dear, dear friend, Ted Kennedy," [Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.)] said. "Ted, Ted, my dear friend, I love you, and I miss you."

“We just don't feel like going on,” said Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.). “He is the center of the Senate, the heart, mind and soul. Just pray.” ...

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) delivered the news of the diagnosis at the Democrats’ weekly policy lunch. The usually boisterous session fell into “stunned silence,” Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) said.

At the Republicans’ lunch, Sen. John Warner (R-Va.) said, “We immediately all bowed our heads and said a prayer.”

Walking out of the Democratic lunch, a visibly shaken Sen. Pat Leahy (D-Vt.) said: "I am having a hard time remembering a day in my 34 years here when I felt this badly."

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illi., frontrunner for the Democratic nomination in this year's presidential primary and the candidate endorsed by Kennedy, called the news "heartbreaking."

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., called Kennedy the "most effective" senator ever and said he was a "fighter" whose "courage and resolve are unmatched."

Let's keep the Kennedy family patriarch in our thoughts and prayers tonight.

could congress override bush's veto?

Is it possible for Congress to override President Bush's SCHIP veto?

Some Democrats seem to think so.

The Committee for a Democratic Majority is sponsoring a petition to President Bush and members of Congress. The "tens of thousands" of people that signed support an override of the SCHIP veto. Who else is behind the petition? Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts.

In an email for the committee, Sen. Kennedy said "If we can afford the war in Iraq, we can afford health insurance for our children. It's that simple."

The Democrat sounded positive when he said asked supporters to help override the veto in under two weeks.

A vote in the House of Representatives is scheduled for October 18.

Others are fighting to override, as well, including a newly-formed coalition that is running an ad campaign blasting Bush for his veto.

The coalition, which includes the AFL-CIO and MoveOn.org, rolled out a nearly $1 million television ad campaign and is targeting about 20 Republicans to vote to override the president's veto of the bill.

The national ad, sponsored by Americans United for Change, an umbrella group of liberal organizations, is running on cable networks.

It includes images of a baby and other children with an announcer saying "George Bush just vetoed Abby." The coalition also promises to rally activists in districts of another 20 House Republicans over the next two weeks.

According to the CNN article, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is cautiously optimistic about overriding the veto. "We take it one day at a time," she said.

An override is entirely plausible at this point, as more and more Republicans are distancing themselves from the president by deserting him on domestic issues.

Cornyn Sees Progress in Iraq

As the President prepares to veto the House bill requiring redeployment of troops from Iraq by April of next year, Senator Cornyn and the Republican rubberstamps in the Senate continue to successfully filibuster meaningful legislation on the war in Iraq.

Earlier this week, Cornyn failed to support our troops by voting against the Webb amendment, which would have provided more rest between deployments for our over-extended military.

Disregarding the latest glum report citing the failure of the Iraqi government to achieve benchmarks established by the administration at the outset of the surge, Bush and Cornyn both agree on one thing - we may not be winning yet, but we're making progress.

"It boils down to how do we win and what constitutes a win," Mr. Cornyn said. "What we hope for and what's important to our national security is that we can stabilize it. ... We don't want to leave any safe havens for groups like al-Qaeda. That ought to be our goal, and I think we're making some progress."

Yeah, it's deja vu all over again. In February of 2006, the Senate armed Services Committee held hearings on the progress in Iraq. From a previous post, here is the exchange between Senator Kennedy and National Intelligence Director John Negroponte.

Kennedy: [Quoting the President] I'm confident of our plan for victory...and we are winning. Those are the words of the President.....Did you tell the President we were winning [the war in Iraq]?....

Negroponte: I personally? Recalling conversations I've had with the President and other members of the administration, my view has always been that we are moving in the right direction, that we're making progress.

I analyze it usually in terms of the political process there, the progress towards achieving their political timetable on the one hand and progress towards developing their army and their police forces, effective military and police forces. And I believe that progress has been made in both those areas. And I believe that yes, things are moving in a positive direction in Iraq - overall.

The year 2007 rang in with the loss of our 3000th solider. Seven months into the surge, that toll stands at over 3600. The April-June period was the deadliest three months for U.S. troops since the March 2003 U.S.-led invasion. Since Negroponte spoke those words a year and a half ago, the toll of Texans on that hallowed list has gone from just over 200 to over 300.

Cornyn has been wrong on the war for five years now. Maybe it's time for Senator Box Turtle to come out of his shell and face facts - Iraq is embroiled in a civil war and the horrifying levels of sectarian violence, the escalating military casualties, the lack of a unity government, our deteriorating military readiness, the daily attacks on the once impenetrable green zone, the lack of essential services, the porous borders, etc., do not constitute progress.

See previous post All's Well That Ends.

Burgess Explains Why He Voted Against Minimum Wage

H.R. 2, the Fair Minimum Wage Act, was part of the Democrats "100 hours" agenda to raise a minimum wage that has been stagnant for almost a decade. A previous post on this bill noted that nearly all area Republicans voted against the increase.

As noted, Burgess was among those Republicans voting against an increase. A concerned constituent recently received a letter from Burgess explaining his rationale for voting against raising the minimum standard, currently stuck at $5.15. Steve Southwell, at Whosplayin, reviewed the arguments and apparently didn't find them too convincing. Here's a sample:

[Burgess:]I was especially disappointed that this legislation did not go through the regular committee process, which includes holding hearings that allow all sides of the issue to be taken into account.

Sour grapes, anyone? MICHAEL BURGESS, THE PEOPLE HAD THEIR HEARING ON NOVEMBER 7TH. We demanded that you weaselly Congressmen quit stalling and playing politics and raise the minimum wage. When the Democrats took control, they took this issue away from your committee because you had proven yourselves useless on getting it done. In 100 hours, the Democrats got it done. You didn't get your chance to attach your neo-con anti-consumer, pro-aristocracy policies to it. Pause for the sound of me playing my violin for you.

Oh, and there's more. Go read it.

So what's next for minimum wage bill? Unfortunately, the Republicans may yet get to attach their neo-con, anti-consumer, pro-aristocracy policies to the bill. The bill passed the House with the unanimous support of Democrats, but failed so far to pass the Senate due to a backlog of amendments introduced by Republicans. The Democrats have failed to get the 60 votes needed to cut off debate. This caused Senator Kennedy to bellow at his Republican counterparts [and if you haven't seen Kennedy's impassioned plea from the Senate floor, you really must]:

What is the price that the workers have to pay to get an increase? What is it about working men and women that you find so offensive?"

The Senate now plans to add tax breaks for small business in order to pick up the needed votes to end debate. The bill would then go to conference, where the House has demanded a bill free from tax breaks. What happens then is uncertain.

Oh, and as long as the Senate debate is tied up on the minimum wage bill, the Iraq war resolution is on hold.

H.R. 5 to Reduce Interest Rates on College Loans

Congressman Tim Bishop, D-New York, was on C-SPAN this morning to discuss H.R. 5, the College Student Relief Act of 2007.

As promised by Speaker Pelosi, H.R. 5 is part of the Democrats' "first 100 hours" agenda. It amends the Higher Education Act of 1965 using a "phased-in" approach to reduce the burden of college expenses by gradually decreasing the interest rate charged for student loans.

Here are some highlights of the the C-SPAN broadcast:

• The interest rate, currently set at 6.12%, will be reduced to 3.4% by 2011.
• The cost of the bill is estimated at $6 billion over 5 years.
• As required by the newly passed paygo rules, the cost of the bill cannot increase the deficit. Its cost will be offset by reducing guarantees to lenders.
• Because of the paygo requirements, the cut in rates is not permanent, but it is the intent of the Democratic leadership to make eventually make the rate cuts permanent.
• The bill is "closed rule" meaning no amendments are allowed.
• Bishop sees this as the first in a series of legislation designed to make college more affordable by the group most squeezed by the recent increase in college tuition costs - the middle class and upper middle class.
• The Senate bill equivalent will be introduced by Senator Kennedy.
• The rates do not apply to current loans. They will be in effect for loans originating after July 1, 2007.

The bill is scheduled for debate on the floor of Congress later this morning.

new orleans: one year later

This morning at 9:38 a.m., Mayor Ray Nagin of New Orleans, Louisiana rang bells to signify the anniversary of the moment the first levee broke during the disastrous run of Hurricane Katrina exactly one year ago. According to Wikipedia, Katrina was "the costliest and one of the deadliest hurricanes in the history of the United States." Today, the nation looks back to the catastrophe that happened one year ago and how we dealt with it and are still dealing with it today.

Politicians across the nation continue to lambast the slow pace at which the government has intervened in the situation. Senator Hillary Clinton, D-New York, said today that she was ready to see the government "step up and do a better job."

A year later, the results are still unacceptable. Contracts for rebuilding are going out to big corporations with ties to the administration while the people who live in the Gulf Coast are being shut out of opportunities. We saw people evicted from hotels and clamoring for housing while 10,000 trailers sat unused at an Arkansas airport. FEMA has already wasted $1.4 billion, with much of the money it spends still not getting to those who need it most.

Senator Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., has called Katrina "a national disgrace" and recommends that the White House take the following actions: "rebuild the levees to withstand another Katrina, focus on rebuilding schools and colleges, and extend unemployment benefits to displaced Gulf Coast workers."

The people of the Gulf deserve a response from their government that's as good as the American people. Instead the White House "recovery plan" starts and stops with public relations. In the meantime, the Gulf Coast sits vulnerable -- almost defenseless against the next storm -- with schools in desperate need of repair and displaced workers in need of help.

MoveOn.org has launched a new book called It Takes a Nation: How Strangers Became Family with a forward by Senator Barack Obama, D-Ill. The book showcases families that were forced to evacuate from the Gulf Coast in the devasating wake of Katrina. Every cent of the profits will be donated to ACORN to help "protect evacuees' rights and rebuild New Orleans right." You can find out more and purchase the book here.

Fortunately, parts of New Orleans were spared and have become fully functional over the past year, CNN reports. Many places are open for business or plan to resume regular schedules before the year is out.

"We are a tale of two cities," said Mary Beth Romig, spokeswoman for the New Orleans Convention and Visitors Bureau. "We have a long way to go in those residential neighborhoods."

However, much of uptown, downtown, the French Quarter, and the business, Garden and Warehouse districts -- all areas that draw out-of-towners -- was "spared from the flooding and they're all thriving now," Romig said.
....
Even the once-ravaged Louisiana Superdome advertises its September 25 reopening, just in time for the Saints' first home game -- an NFL Monday-nighter against the Atlanta Falcons.

Other areas were not so lucky. Many places sit in ruins. On a tour today with a group of House Democrats, Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, said that "it's hard to believe this is the United States." President Bush is also expected to tour the area this week; he is expected to arrive in New Orleans later this evening.

Even if you have already donated money, food, or volunteered your time in the effort, please continue to do what you can to help rebuild and recover in New Orleans and other areas on the Gulf Coast. Buy the book from MoveOn.org, donate to UNICEF or Oxfam America, and let your elected officials know that it's time to step up, even if it is a year too late.

stem cell research enhancement act: vetoed

Recently, the Senate passed legislation that would enhance stem cell research by loosening restrictions on federal funding. The legislation passed in the U.S. House back in 2005 without help from several North Texas Republicans that voted against it: Rep. Michael Burgess (Flower Mound), Rep. Ralph Hall (Rockwall), Rep. Jeb Hensarling (Dallas), Rep. Sam Johnson (Plano), Rep. Kenny Marchant (Carrollton), and Rep. Pete Sessions (Dallas). Two North Texas Republicans supported stem cell research and are to be commended: Rep. Kay Granger (Fort Worth) and Rep. Joe Barton (Ennis).

How did the Democrats vote? Totally in favor of stem cell research. Texas Democrats stood in solidarity; not a single one voted against the legislation. If you're represented by a Texas Democrat, take a minute to write them a letter and thank them for supporting stem cell research.

Over in the Senate, our two Republican senators were split. Sen. John Cornyn voted against the stem cell research legislation, while Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison voted for it. Sen. Hutchison is to be commended for standing up and letting her vote be counted to help save lives. Unfortunately, Sen. Cornyn decided to cater to the religious right.

Regardless of how everyone voted, President Bush used the first veto of his presidency today to reject this legislation that was overwhelmingly passed by Congress.

"This bill would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others," Bush said Wednesday afternoon. "It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect. So I vetoed it."

Attending the White House event were a group of families with children who were born from "adopted" frozen embryos that had been left unused at fertility clinics.

"These boys and girls are not spare parts," he said of the children in the audience. "They remind us of what is lost when embryos are destroyed in the name of research. They remind us that we all begin our lives as a small collection of cells."

Despite Bush's decision, the issue has divided much of the Republican Party. Only two Texas Republicans (North Texas Reps. Barton and Granger) strayed from Republican talking points to cast their vote in favor of the legislation, but across the nation things were different. In the Senate, many states were split with one senator voting one way and the other voting another. In the House, a coalition of 200 Democrats and Republicans co-sponsored the legislation. Even top Republicans in Congress were forced to publicly disagree with the president.

The Senate bill's principal sponsor, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania, who recently survived a brush with cancer, was joined by Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tennessee, a physician who argued that Bush's policy is too restrictive.

"I am pro-life, but I disagree with the president's decision to veto the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act," Frist said in a statement. "Given the potential of this research and the limitations of the existing lines eligible for federally funded research, I think additional lines should be made available."

Currently, House Republicans plan to re-introduce the legislation in an attempt to override President Bush's veto. Please help this effort! If your legislator voted against the bill last year, there's a chance that public opinion could change their mind this year. If they supported it last year, make sure you write them to encourage them to cast the same vote to override the veto. Right now, House leadership isn't sure that they'll have enough support for the measure, so this requires immediate action if we want to save lives. Contact your representatives in Congress here.

All's Well that Ends

There was an interesting exchange today in the Senate Armed Services Committee between Senator Kennedy and National Intelligence Director John Negroponte.

Kennedy: [Quoting the President] I'm confident of our plan for victory...and we are winning. Those are the words of the President.....Did you tell the President we were winning [the war in Iraq]?....

Negroponte: I personally? Recalling conversations I've had with the President and other members of the administration, my view has always been that we are moving in the right direction, that we're making progress. I analyze it usually in terms of the
political process there, the progress towards achieving their political timetable on the one hand and progress towards developing their army and their police forces, effective military and police forces. And I believe that progress has been made in both those areas. And I believe that yes, things are moving in a positive direction in Iraq - overall.

Winning? In the words of Jon Stewart, uh, not so much. But we're making progress, right? So what's that look like? Senator Kennedy asks Director of Defense Intelligence Agency, Lt. Gen. Michael Maples to give his assessment:

Maples: ....I do believe that this last week has been a very significant week in Iraq. The level of sectarian violence increased significantly on the ground based on the bombings of the mosques. And we saw exactly the deep divides that exist between the Shia and the Sunni in Iraq....We're also in a very tenuous situation right now, I believe. I think that more violence, were it to occur, were it to be stimulated by Al Qaeda, would have a very significant impact on the situation in Iraq.....

Thirteen hundred Iraqis are dead in sectarian violence since the shrine attack in what the administration finally admits is a low level civil war. But it hasn't yet escalated into an all out civil war...so we're making progress.