Today in Washington D. C. - April 27, 2009

The Senate resumes consideration of a bill to crack down on financial fraud, S. 386. Around 5:30, the Senate will vote on cloture on the bill. If cloture is invoked, the Judiciary committee substitute amendment will be agreed to and a vote on final passage will occur at noon on Tuesday.

Confirmation: Tomorrow - Tuesday --the Senate will begin up to 8 hours of debate on the nomination of abortion advocate Gov. Kathleen Sebelius to be Secretary of Health and Human Services. While the President is itching to fill the final seat in his Cabinet, with Gov. Sebelius, she did little to help her cause last week by vetoing a popular Kansas bill on women's health. By rejecting SB 218, a proposal that passed by wide margins in the House (82-43) and Senate (25-11), Sebelius proved just how beholden she is to the radical abortion industry. She blocked nominal changes to the state's health policy, including: an adjustment to the state's partial-birth abortion ban, a provision allowing women who survive a botched late-term abortion to bring civil suits against the doctors responsible, and new language to be included in the information mothers receive before an about abortion, namely that it "will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique living human being."

Tony Perkins, Director of the Family Research Center, identified that:

Sebelius said that she couldn't support the changes to the late-term abortion ban because they were "unconstitutional," a notion that's ridiculous on its face since the modifications would have made Kansas compatible with federal law. Meanwhile, the Governor's ally, notorious abortionist George Tiller, is getting quite a return on his $35,450 direct investment in Sebelius's political career. If the state legislature can't find another two votes to override Sebelius, her veto will be good for his business. Fewer restrictions on Tiller's shop means more abortions, and in turn, bigger profits with which to buy the support of politicians like Sebelius.

. . . Sen. Jim DeMint added . . . "the overwhelming majority of Americans oppose the late-term abortions of babies who can survive on their own... Gov. Sebelius's veto... is an insult to Americans who respect human dignity," he said. "This is a clear example of the Governor's extreme pro-abortion agenda that should disqualify her from leading our nation's health agency."

ACT NOW - Voice your concern on Sebelius nomination: 1) sign the Family Research Council petition to Senate leaders Harry Reid (D-NV) and Mitch McConnell (R-KY). ; and 2) Contact your senators! Tell them you want a NO vote on the confirmation of radical pro abortionist Gov. Kathleen Sebelius as Secretary of Heath and Human Services.

On Wednesday, the Senate is expected to move into more muddy water and take up the conference report on the fiscal year 2010 budget. Later in the week, housing bills could come to the floor.

National Security: After spending a week discussing the possibilities of investigating or even prosecuting people for working to protect the country from terror attacks, it’s a bit ironic to see the administration going to such efforts to close Guantanamo Bay and release some of its detainees into the U.S.

President Obama has ordered the Guantanamo Bay facility closed and with only 270 days to go it appears the administration still has no plan as to what it will do with all 200+ detainees. However, it appears that they have figured out what to do with some of them. According to the AP, “The Obama administration is edging toward taking some prisoners to the U.S., most likely to Virginia.” The Los Angeles Times wrote on Friday, “Administration officials also believe that settling some of them in American communities will set an example, helping to persuade other nations to accept Guantanamo detainees too.”

However, other countries have resisted accepting detainees. The AP notes, “Some European leaders argue that if the detainees are to be released anywhere, it should be in the United States. . . . As many as 60, if freed, cannot go back to their homelands because they could face abuse, imprisonment or death.” And The New York Times reported last week, “David H. Remes, a lawyer for 16 Yemeni detainees, said it appeared that many of the men might remain in American custody. ‘Unless President Obama reconsiders his decision to close Guantánamo,’ Mr. Remes said, ‘the Yemeni detainees would have to be brought to the U.S. and put in some sort of prison.’”

On Wednesday, Attorney General Eric Holder is scheduled to give a speech in Germany discussing Guantanamo, possibly to urge European leaders to accept some detainees. But there has yet to be any public discussion of the rationale for releasing some detainees into the United States. Sen Mitch McConnell is troubled by that fact and said on Friday,

The question remains, as it does with all detainees held at Guantanamo: does their release make America safer? Surely the administration will not release these terrorist-trained detainees onto the streets of a U.S. community before providing to Congress the legal rationale for doing so, and a guarantee of safety for American citizens.

Can the administration assure the American people that releasing men trained in terrorist training camps into American society poses no danger to our citizens? To date, they have not done so. There’s a reason U.S. law prohibits the entry of anyone trained in a terrorist camp. Why that law would be ignored to bring terrorist-trained detainees into American cities has not been answered by this administration.

Politico in an article "McConnell blasts Obama foreign policy" characterized McConnel' s remarks:

In a major broadside . . . McConnell ripped into Obama on a variety of fronts — his Hugo Chavez handshake, his vow to shutter Gitmo and, above all, his decision to release Bush-era memos outlining harsh interrogation methods used on terror suspects and possible congressional probes into the issue.

Weakening our tools of intelligence through an investigation of the intelligence community and other key decision makers would, by definition, make that pledge impossible to fulfill. It would also serve to divide us, I fear, at a time when we must continue to present a united and determined front to our enemies... In my view, the commander in chief has an obligation to unify the country while we are at war and at risk. Looked at in this context, attacking each other on these issues is not only counterproductive, it’s dangerous.

In a broader philosophical vein, the leader took issue with Obama's promise to change the country's relationship with Cuba, Iran and other longtime adversaries.

The rush to initiate ‘fresh starts’ with old adversaries or to find quick solutions to the many complex problems we face is not always advisable when it comes to advancing our long-term interests, or in preserving and strengthening alliances or our relationships with allies’

---

Tags: Barack Obama, Budget, Gitmo, Kathleen Sebelius, Mitch McConnell, terrorists, US Congress, US House, US Senate, Washington D.C. To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!