DebateGate

Conyers accepts responsibility for possible ethics violations
By Jonathan E. Kaplan and Jackie Kucinich
 
Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) has "accepted responsibility" for possibly violating House rules by requiring his official staff to perform campaign-related work, according to a statement quietly released by the House ethics committee late Friday evening.

The top Republican and Democratic members on the ethics panel, Reps. Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) and Howard Berman (D-Calif.), said in a statement that Conyers acknowledged a "lack of clarity" in communicating what was expected of his official staff and that he accepted responsibility for his actions.

"[Conyers] agreed to take a number of additional, significant steps to ensure that his office complies with all rules and standards regarding campaign and
personal work by congressional staff," they stated. "We have concluded that this matter should be resolved through the issuance of this public statement."

The finding by the ethics panel could spark debate, and perhaps eclipse, the first week of the incoming-Democratic majority’s plans to change the House ethics rules, as well as raise questions about Conyers’ standing to chair the Judiciary Committee.

On Dec. 14, Conyers sent a letter to his supporters from his campaign website announcing that he had been elected as chairman-designate of the House Judiciary Committee. Berman is the second-ranking Democrat on the panel.

A Pelosi spokesman said Conyers will remain chairman of the Judiciary Committee.

The House ethics committee conditions that Conyers has agreed to must be complied with throughout the 110th Congress.

Conyers had alarmed Democrats, poised to recapture the House after 12 years in the minority, by indicating that he would begin impeachment proceedings against President Bush.

In May, a spokesman for Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), said that she told her Democratic colleagues in a closed meeting, "that impeachment is off the table; she is not interested in pursuing it."

As House Republicans and Democrats prepare for former President Gerald Ford’s funeral and the transfer of power set to take place next week, aides to Pelosi were not available for comment.

The ethics inquiry began in December, 2003 when former staff members complained to the ethics panel, formerly named the House Committee on Standards and Official Conduct, that Conyers had required his official staffers to work on campaigns, babysit his children, and run personal errands. Conyers subsequently hired Stanley Brand, a well-respected defense lawyer with a long track record of defending public officials implicated in corruption cases.

In 2003, Reps. Joel Hefley (R-Colo.) and Alan Mollohan (D-W.Va.) headed the ethics committee.

The Hill reported last March that two former Conyers’ aides alleged that he repeatedly violated House ethics rules by requiring aides to work on local and state
campaigns, and babysit and chauffeur his children.  Deanna Maher, a former deputy chief of staff in the Detroit office, and Sydney Rooks, a former legal counsel in his district office, shared numerous letters, memos, e-mails, handwritten notes and expense reports with The Hill.

They also sent the same materials to the House ethics panel, the FBI and the U.S. attorney’s office. House rules allow the chairman and ranking member of the ethics panel to initiate informal inquiries into allegations of misconduct in the absence of a formal complaint.

Hastings and Berman said in their statement that Conyers provided information and documents to the panel. Committee staff also interviewed witnesses.  They also said that Conyers agreed to take six steps to ensure that the matter remain closed. First, he agreed to prohibit his personal congressional staff, other than his chief of staff, from engaging in any voluntary campaign-related work in the 110th Congress unless that staff members takes a leave of absence and obtains prior approval from the wthics Committee.

He also must take several additional steps to make it abundantly clear to his government-paid aides that they need not work on campaigns to gain employment or stay employed in his office. In addition, he will have to maintain a detailed time-keeping system that he implemented during the course of the committee’s inquiry.

"Provided that the above requirements are complied with, this matter will remain closed, and the Committee will take no further action on it," Hastings and Berman said.

The following is the text of the House ethics committee statement regarding Conyers:

December 29, 2006
Statement of Chairman Doc Hastings and Ranking Minority Member Howard L. Berman Regarding Representative John Conyers

The Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a), initiated an informal inquiry in December 2003 into reports that members of the congressional staff of Representative John Conyers had performed campaign activity on official time and in some instances using official resources, and that some staff members may have been compelled to do campaign work or personal work for Representative Conyers. The assertions in the reports, if true, could implicate a number of laws and House rules applicable to Members, including: House Rule 23, clause 1 (requiring the conduct of a Member or employee to reflect creditably on the House of representatives); House Rule 23, clause 8 (requiring that congressional staff perform official duties commensurate with compensation); 31 U.S.C. § 1301(a) and corresponding regulations of the Committee on House Administration (providing that official funds may be used only for the purposes appropriated); and 18 U.S.C § 606 (prohibiting adverse personnel action or intimidation to secure a "contribution of money or other valuable thing" including services, for a political purpose). Committee Rule 18(a) permits the Committee, in the absence of a filed complaint, to consider "any information in its possession indicating that a Member, officer, or employee may have committed a violation of the Code of Official Conduct or any law, rule, regulation, or other standard of conduct . . ." The Chairman and Ranking Minority Member may jointly gather additional information concerning such a potential violation unless and until an investigative subcommittee is established.  During the course of their inquiry, the Chairman and Ranking Member asked for and received information, including documents, from several sources, including Representative Conyers. Committee staff also interviewed witnesses regarding the allegations.  In the course of providing information to the Committee, Representative Conyers acknowledged what he characterized as a "lack of clarity" in his communications with staff members regarding their official duties and responsibilities, and accepted responsibility for his actions. Representative Conyers also provided the Committee with documents indicating that he had begun taking steps to provide  clearer guidance to staff regarding the requirement that campaign work and official work be separate.  After reviewing the information gathered during the inquiry, and in light of Representative Conyers’ cooperation with the inquiry, we have concluded that this matter should be resolved through the issuance of this public statement and the agreement by Representative Conyers to take a number of additional, significant steps to ensure that his office complies with all rules and standards regarding campaign and personal work by congressional staff. Representative Conyers has agreed to the following conditions:

1. Prohibiting his personal congressional staff (other than his Chief of Staff) from performing any campaign-related work, including work done on a voluntary basis, during the 110th Congress, unless the staff member takes a paid position on his campaign while on leave without pay status and obtains prior written approval from the Committee.

2. Informing staff members in writing of the prohibition set forth above against the voluntary performance of campaign work.

3. Distributing a memorandum to each member of his personal congressional staff which clearly sets forth all House rules concerning (1) the performance of campaign and other non-official work by congressional staff members and (2) the prohibition against the performance of any campaign-related work being conducted in either his congressional or district offices. Additionally, this memorandum will explicitly state that the performance of campaign or other non-official work by staff members may not be required as a condition of their employment.

4. Directing that meetings of his personal congressional staff be held annually in which the House rules concerning staff participation in campaign activities are discussed and explained. In addition, a description of these rules will be made a part of the orientation for all new staff employees.

5. Continuing to maintain the detailed time-keeping system initiated by Rep. Conyers during the course of the Committee’s inquiry.

6. Requiring that all members of his congressionalstaff attend a briefing conducted by Committee counsel on the application of, and compliance with, applicable House rules concerning the performance of campaign and other non-official work by congressional staff members.

Provided that the above requirements are complied with, this matter will remain closed, and the Committee will take no further action on it.
 
http://www.thehill.com:8888/thehill/opencms/TheHill/News/Frontpage/121306/conyers.html

If You Want Something, Go Get It
By Ruben Navarrette

SAN DIEGO -- A multimillionaire businessman once explained to me the secret to his success. A lot of it, he said, was about setting yourself apart by being willing to stomach the sort of ordeals that others won't.

"I do things that make other people nauseous,'' he said, explaining that he had often gambled his entire net worth on business deals that paid off.

His point was that while a lot of people dream about being rich and famous because they think it will provide them a life of comfort, what they don't know is that the relative few who realize the dream are those who are willing to put up with life's discomforts on the road to success.

That bit of insight was ricocheting around in my head as I watched the splendid new film, "The Pursuit of Happyness.'' The movie showcases Will Smith and tells the inspirational story of Chris Gardner, who went from homeless single dad to millionaire stockbroker -- but only after enduring tremendous hardship.

Much of the buzz around the film has centered on the fact that it's a great father-son movie. And that it is. It's the kind of story that doesn't get told often enough, about the lengths to which a father will go to meet his responsibilities to his child.

Gardner worked nights and weekends selling medical equipment so that he could spend his days plowing through a highly competitive but unpaid internship at a prestigious brokerage firm. And even when things got really tough, and both father and son wound up on the street and forced to spend nights in a public restroom, Gardner never gave up on his aspirations of attaining a better life for himself and his son.

However, the beauty of this film is not what it tells us about fatherhood but about fulfilling one's potential. That message is summed up in a powerful scene where Gardner catches himself discouraging his son from dreams of a career in professional basketball. Realizing that he sounds much like the people who have discouraged him throughout his life, Gardner pauses and does an about-face.

"Don't ever let someone tell you that you can't do something,'' he tells his son. "Not even me.''

For Gardner, ambitions are sacred and worth defending.

"You got a dream,'' he says, "you gotta protect it. People can't do something, so they wanna tell you that you can't do it. You want something, go get it. Period.''

Amen. Imagine what kind of country we'd be living in if all Americans thought that way. As it stands, too many of us don't. Too many of us cling to excuses, dwell on the negative, look for scapegoats and think in terms of what we can't accomplish rather than what we can. Sometimes they find those scapegoats in this country, in the form of immigrants -- both legal and illegal. At other times, they gaze across the oceans and quiver in the face of what they consider sinister forces such as globalization.

According to polls, most Americans no longer believe in the American Dream. Perhaps that's because so many of us are absolutely terrified of competition, no matter where it comes from. Many Americans talk openly about the need to seal our border, to put a moratorium on legal immigration and to impose tariffs on foreign goods to give our own products a leg up in the marketplace. Add in the class envy and the eat-the-rich nonsense being pushed by populist snake oil salesmen in politics and the media and you get a sense for one of the most dangerous threats to our society -- the possibility that a lot of Americans will just feel so outmatched by forces larger than themselves that they'll give up, not just on their dreams but on their lives.

It's hard to imagine someone such as Chris Gardner wallowing in defeat or giving up or blaming others for his failures, and that is one reason why he has accomplished so much, while millions of Americans are still having trouble getting off the starting blocks.

You see, Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, got it exactly right. It's the pursuit of happiness. No matter what country you were born in, you're entitled to nothing. And no matter what you desire, no one is going to serve it up to you on a platter. It's like Gardner said, if you want something, you have to go get it. Period.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/printpage/?url=http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/12/if_you_want_something_go_get_i.html

Military considers recruiting foreigners
Expedited citizenship would be an incentive
By Bryan Bender, Globe Staff  |  December 26, 2006

WASHINGTON -- The armed forces, already struggling to meet recruiting goals, are considering expanding the number of noncitizens in the ranks -- including disputed proposals to open recruiting stations overseas and putting more immigrants on a faster track to US citizenship if they volunteer -- according to Pentagon officials.

Foreign citizens serving in the US military is a highly charged issue, which could expose the Pentagon to criticism that it is essentially using mercenaries to defend the country. Other analysts voice concern that a large contingent of noncitizens under arms could jeopardize national security or reflect badly on Americans' willingness to serve in uniform.

The idea of signing up foreigners who are seeking US citizenship is gaining traction as a way to address a critical need for the Pentagon, while fully absorbing some of the roughly one million immigrants that enter the United States legally each year.

The proposal to induct more noncitizens, which is still largely on the drawing board, has to clear a number of hurdles. So far, the Pentagon has been quiet about specifics -- including who would be eligible to join, where the recruiting stations would be, and what the minimum standards might involve, including English proficiency. In the meantime, the Pentagon and immigration authorities have expanded a program that accelerates citizenship for legal residents who volunteer for the military.

And since Sept. 11, 2001, the number of imm igrants in uniform who have become US citizens has increased from 750 in 2001 to almost 4,600 last year, according to military statistics.

With severe manpower strains because of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan -- and a mandate to expand the overall size of the military -- the Pentagon is under pressure to consider a variety of proposals involving foreign recruits, according to a military affairs analyst.

"It works as a military idea and it works in the context of American immigration," said Thomas Donnelly , a military scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute in Washington and a leading proponent of recruiting more foreigners to serve in the military.

As the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan grind on, the Pentagon has warned Congress and the White House that the military is stretched "to the breaking point."

Both President Bush and Robert M. Gates, his new defense secretary, have acknowledged that the total size of the military must be expanded to help alleviate the strain on ground troops, many of whom have been deployed repeatedly in combat theaters.

Bush said last week that he has ordered Gates to come up with a plan for the first significant increase in ground forces since the end of the Cold War. Democrats who are preparing to take control of Congress, meanwhile, promise to make increasing the size of the military one of their top legislative priorities in 2007.

"With today's demands placing such a high strain on our service members, it becomes more crucial than ever that we work to alleviate their burden," said Representative Ike Skelton , a Missouri Democrat who is set to chair the House Armed Services Committee, and who has been calling for a larger Army for more than a decade.

But it would take years and billions of dollars to recruit, train, and equip the 30,000 troops and 5,000 Marines the Pentagon says it needs. And military recruiters, fighting the perception that signing up means a ticket to Baghdad, have had to rely on financial incentives and lower standards to meet their quotas.

That has led Pentagon officials to consider casting a wider net for noncitizens who are already here, said Lieutenant Colonel Bryan Hilferty , an Army spokesman.

Already, the Army and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement division of the Department of Homeland Security have "made it easier for green-card holders who do enlist to get their citizenship," Hilferty said.

Other Army officials, who asked not to be identified, said personnel officials are working with Congress and other parts of the government to test the feasibility of going beyond US borders to recruit soldiers and Marines.

Currently, Pentagon policy stipulates that only immigrants legally residing in the United States are eligible to enlist. There are currently about 30,000 noncitizens who serve in the US armed forces, making up about 2 percent of the active-duty force, according to statistics from the military and the Council on Foreign Relations. About 100 noncitizens have died in Iraq and Afghanistan.

A recent change in US law, however, gave the Pentagon authority to bring immigrants to the United States if it determines it is vital to national security. So far, the Pentagon has not taken advantage of it, but the calls are growing to take use the new authority.

Indeed, some top military thinkers believe the United States should go as far as targeting foreigners in their native countries.

"It's a little dramatic," said Michael O'Hanlon , a military specialist at the nonpartisan Brookings Institution and another supporter of the proposal. "But if you don't get some new idea how to do this, we will not be able to achieve an increase" in the size of the armed forces.

"We have already done the standard things to recruit new soldiers, including using more recruiters and new advertising campaigns," O'Hanlon added.

O'Hanlon and others noted that the country has relied before on sizable numbers of noncitizens to serve in the military -- in the Revolutionary War, for example, German and French soldiers served alongside the colonists, and locals were recruited into US ranks to fight insurgents in the Philippines.

Other nations have recruited foreign citizens: In France, the famed Foreign Legion relies on about 8,000 noncitizens; Nepalese soldiers called Gurkhas have fought and died with British Army forces for two centuries; and the Swiss Guard, which protects the Vatican, consists of troops who hail from many nations.

"It is not without historical precedent," said Donnelly, author of a recent book titled "The Army We Need," which advocates for a larger military.

Still, to some military officials and civil rights groups, relying on large number of foreigners to serve in the military is offensive.

The Hispanic rights advocacy group National Council of La Raza has said the plan sends the wrong message that Americans themselves are not willing to sacrifice to defend their country. Officials have also raised concerns that immigrants would be disproportionately sent to the front lines as "cannon fodder" in any conflict.

Some within the Army privately express concern that a big push to recruit noncitizens would smack of "the decline of the American empire," as one Army official who asked not to be identified put it.

Officially, the military remains confident that it can meet recruiting goals -- no matter how large the military is increased -- without having to rely on foreigners.

"The Army can grow to whatever size the nation wants us to grow to," Hilferty said. "National defense is a national challenge, not the Army's challenge."

He pointed out that just 15 years ago, during the Gulf War, the Army had a total of about 730,000 active-duty soldiers, amounting to about one American in 350 who were serving in the active-duty Army.

"Today, with 300 million Americans and about 500,000 active-duty soldiers, only about one American in 600 is an active-duty soldier," he said. "America did then, and we do now, have an all-volunteer force, and I see no reason why America couldn't increase the number of Americans serving."

But Max Boot, a national security specialist at the Council on Foreign Relations, said that the number of noncitizens the armed forces have now is relatively small by historical standards.

"In the 19th century, when the foreign-born population of the United States was much higher, so was the percentage of foreigners serving in the military," Boot wrote in 2005.

"During the Civil War, at least 20 percent of Union soldiers were immigrants, and many of them had just stepped off the boat before donning a blue uniform. There were even entire units, like the 15th Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry [the Scandinavian Regiment] and General Louis Blenker's German Division, where English was hardly spoken."

"The military would do well today to open its ranks not only to legal immigrants but also to illegal ones and, as important, to untold numbers of young men and women who are not here now but would like to come," Boot added.

"No doubt many would be willing to serve for some set period, in return for one of the world's most precious commodities -- US citizenship. Some might deride those who sign up as mercenaries, but these troops would have significantly different motives than the usual soldier of fortune."


http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/12/26/military_considers_recruiting_foreigners?mode=PF

Nonprofit Connects Murtha, Lobbyists
Ties to Pa. Group Mutually Beneficial

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, December 25, 2006; A01



For a quarter of a century, Carmen Scialabba labored for Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), helping parcel out the billions of dollars that came through the House Appropriations Committee, so when the disabled aide needed a favor, Murtha was there.

In 2001, Murtha announced the creation of Scialabba's nonprofit agency for the disabled in Johnstown, Pa. The next year, with Scialabba still on his staff, Murtha secured a half-million dollars for the group, the Pennsylvania Association for Individuals With Disabilities (PAID), and put another $150,000 in the pipeline for 2003, according to appropriations committee records and former committee aides. Since then, the group has helped hundreds of disabled people find work.

But the group serves another function as well. PAID has become a gathering point for defense contractors and lobbyists with business before Murtha's defense appropriations subcommittee, and for Pennsylvania businesses and universities that have thrived on federal money obtained by Murtha.

Lobbyists and corporate officials serve as directors on the nonprofit group's board, where they help raise money and find jobs for Johnstown's disabled workers. Some of those lobbyists have served as intermediaries between the defense contractors and businessmen on the board, and Murtha and his aides.

That arrangement over the years has yielded millions of dollars in federal support for the contractors, businesses and universities, and hundreds of thousands in consulting and lobbying fees to Murtha's favored lobbying shops, according to Federal Election Commission records and lobbying disclosure forms. In turn, many of PAID's directors have kept Murtha's campaigns flush with cash.

When the Democrats take control of Congress on Jan. 4, ethics and budget restructuring will be the first orders of business. Among the provisions in the Democrats' ethics package are demands for more transparency in the doling out of federal funds to home-district projects and a required pledge that no earmarks benefit a member of Congress personally. That could put an uncomfortable spotlight on lawmakers such as Murtha.

"It's a real tangled web between the congressman, the nonprofit, the defense contractors and the lobbyists," said Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan watchdog group. "It's hard to say where one stops and the others start."

Murtha declined to respond to numerous phone calls and e-mails from The Washington Post requesting comment.

Scialabba, a former Marine whose young boxing career was cut short by polio and who relies on a wheelchair, said PAID's efforts to put a chronically underemployed population to work have rendered it above reproach. The group has provided information, training and resources to encourage businesses to hire disabled workers.

"Everyone's trying to make this a political thing, and it makes me very mad," Scialabba said last week in a brief interview, defending the collaborations. "Would you rather have tax dollars spent on some [disabled] guy sitting at home? We're not looking for handouts, damn it."

But to some watchdogs, including Taxpayers for Common Sense, Democracy 21 and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, PAID looks a lot like the cozy nexus between lawmakers, lobbyists and business interests that Democrats railed against in the midterm campaigns.

Its board of directors includes Scialabba and five government contractors who have received millions of federal dollars through appropriations measures obtained by Murtha. Its advisory council includes three lobbyists from KSA Consulting, which employs Scialabba and employed Murtha's brother, Kit. Its honorary board members include still more defense contractors.

In turn, the lobbyists and businesses associated with PAID have become supporters of Murtha's campaigns, contributing a total of nearly $125,000 in the past three election cycles, when Murtha raised a total of $7.2 million, according to campaign records. And those same players have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars at three lobbying shops with close Murtha ties: the PMA Group, Scialabba's KSA Consulting and Ervin Technical Associates.

In the past year, Murtha, a Marine combat veteran and defense hawk, has gained national prominence as the leader of the Democratic charge to pull U.S. troops from Iraq. After the Democrats won control of Congress in November, he made an unsuccessful bid to become House majority leader, with strong backing from House Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) The main source of his power is his perch as the top Democrat on the defense appropriations subcommittee, which controls nearly a half-trillion federal dollars a year. His largess to his friends and hardscrabble district is legendary. But now that he is assuming the chairmanship of the defense subcommittee, his actions are coming under new scrutiny.

Under Murtha's watch, for instance, Windber Medical Center has been transformed from a struggling hospital outside of Johnstown into a burgeoning cancer research center, thriving on Defense Department funding. Hospital officials have paid the PMA Group some $380,000 in lobbying fees since signing on in 2001. And hospital employees have financed Murtha's political campaigns to the tune of nearly $25,000.

"It sounds like DeLay Inc.," said Melanie Sloan, executive director of the Democratic-leaning Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, referring to former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), who set up his own charities that became the focus of attention by businesses and lobbyists seeking to curry favor with him.

But Murtha has his defenders. "Jack Murtha is supportive of everything you can think of around here, from roads and sewers to defense contractors," said Bill Kuchera, chief executive of Kuchera Industries of Windber, Pa., and a PAID director. "But without Jack Murtha, there'd still be a Kuchera. We don't lean on Jack Murtha at all."

Murtha repeatedly intervened on behalf of PAID to help Kuchera expand.

After PAID's founding, Scialabba approached Kuchera to get involved. Kuchera jumped, not only joining the group's board but ramping up hiring of disabled workers, who now compose a third of the 200 employees in his company's defense business. The federal government picked up Kuchera's $7 million training bill. This year, Murtha earmarked $1.3 million for Kuchera's chemical and biological weapons detection research.

Kuchera employees donated more than $31,000 to Murtha in the past three election campaigns, according to federal election records. Between 1990 and 2000, contributions totaled $1,000. And congressional lobbying disclosure forms tally $140,000 in payments since 2001 from Kuchera to Ervin Technical Associates, whose chairman is former representative Joseph M. McDade (R-Pa.), a close Murtha ally.

The Kuchera experience is not unique. Ed Washington, another PAID director, hails from MTS Technologies, an Arlington defense contractor that recently secured $8.9 million in federal funds to expand its Johnstown facility. MTS's lobbyist, the PMA Group, has disclosed some $300,000 in fees from the company since 1998. And PMA has returned the favor: Since 1989, the firm's employees have given Murtha $107,500.

Daniel DeVos, an honorary PAID board member, represents Concurrent Technologies, whose employees have lavished Murtha with more than $53,000 in campaign contributions and PMA with $820,000 in fees. That may sound steep, but the rewards have been substantial: a $150 million contract to operate the Navy Metalworking Center; a $4 million contract from the Army to evaluate fuel-cell systems; and $1.7 million for a weapons of mass destruction response laboratory, among others.

Another PAID director, Jim Estep, is a central figure in an investigation of Rep. Alan B. Mollohan (D-W.Va.), a Murtha ally and fellow member of the Appropriations Committee. Estep heads the West Virginia High-Technology Consortium Foundation and the Institute for Scientific Research, two nonprofit organizations that Mollohan helped set up and has plied with federal funds.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/24/AR2006122400919_pf.html

Man Sets Self Aflame in Calif. Protest

A man used flammable liquid to light himself on fire, apparently to protest a San Joaquin Valley school district's decision to change the names of winter and spring breaks to Christmas and Easter vacation.
The man, who was not immediately identified, on Friday also set fire to a Christmas tree, an American flag and a revolutionary flag replica, said Fire Captain Garth Milam.

Seeing the flames, Sheriff's Deputy Lance Ferguson grabbed a fire extinguisher and ran to the man.

Flames were devouring a Christmas tree next to the Liberty Bell, where public events and demonstrations are common.

Beside the tree the man stood with an American flag draped around his shoulders and a red gas can over his head.

Seeing the deputy, the man poured the liquid over his head. He quickly burst into flames when the fumes from the gas met the flames from the tree.

The deputy ordered the man to drop to the ground as he and a parole agent sprayed him with fire extinguishers.

"The man stood there like this," the deputy said with his arms across his chest and his head bent down, "Saying no, no, no."

The man suffered first degree burns on his shoulders and arms, Milam said.

Kern County Sheriff's Deputy John Leyendecker said the man had a sign that read: "(expletive) the religious establishment and KHSD."

On Thursday, the Kern High School Board of Trustees voted to use the names Christmas and Easter instead of winter and spring breaks.


http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/12/23/D8M6KVQG0.html

Sen. Johnson suffers possible stroke By MARY CLARE JALONICK, Associated Press Writer
 11 minutes ago
 


Democratic Sen. Tim Johnson (news, bio, voting record) of South Dakota suffered a possible stroke Wednesday and was taken to a Washington hospital, his office said. If he should be unable to continue to serve, it could halt the scheduled Democratic takeover of the Senate.

Democrats won a 51-49 majority in the November election. South Dakota's governor, who would appoint any temporary replacement, is a Republican.

Johnson became disoriented during a call with reporters at midday, stuttering in response to a question. He appeared to recover, asking if there were any additional questions before ending the call.

Johnson spokeswoman Julianne Fisher said he had walked back to his Capitol office after the call with reporters but appeared to not be feeling well. The Capitol physician came to his office and examined him, and it was decided he needed to go to the hospital.

He was taken by ambulance to George Washington University Hospital around noon, Fisher said.

"It was caught very early," she said.

Johnson's office released a statement saying he had suffered a possible stroke.

"At this stage, he is undergoing a comprehensive evaluation by the stroke team," the statement read.

The White House issued a statement wishing him a speedy recovery.

"Our thoughts and prayers are with Senator Johnson and his family," said spokesman Alex Conant.

If the two-term senator, 59, is unable to serve when the 110th Congress convenes Jan. 4, South Dakota Gov. Mike Rounds would appoint a replacement. Johnson is up for re-election in 2008.

South Dakota Secretary of State Chris Nelson said there are no special restrictions on such an appointment and a replacement would not have to be from the same political party.

Johnson turns 60 on Dec. 28. The centrist Democrat was first elected to the Senate in 1996 and has been one of the more reserved members of the chamber, rarely taking center stage at news conferences.

He served in the House for 10 years from 1987 to 1997. His focus has been on committee assignments important to his state's interests — Indian Affairs and Energy and Natural Resources — as well as a spot on Appropriations. The latter allows him to direct funds to South Dakota.

Johnson narrowly defeated Republican John Thune in his 2002 re-election bid. Thune defeated Democratic Sen. Tom Daschle two years later.

Thune issued a statement saying his prayers were with Johnson and his family. Rounds also issued a statement, saying he was hoping for good news.

Johnson has worked as a lawyer and county prosecutor and served several years in the 1970s and 1980s in the South Dakota state Legislature.

Both Johnson and his wife have battled cancer.

The senator underwent prostate cancer treatment in 2004, and subsequent tests have shown him to be clear of the disease. Barb Johnson is a breast cancer survivor.

The couple have two sons and a daughter: Brooks, who served in the U.S. Army in Bosnia, Kosovo, South Korea, Afghanistan and Iraq; Brendan, a Sioux Falls lawyer, and Kelsey, who works in Washington.

In response to one reporter's question on the Wednesday conference call, Johnson said he was most looking forward to spending the holidays with his family and grandchildren.

____

Associated Press Writers Laurie Kellman and Natasha Metzler in Washington and Dirk Lammers in Sioux Falls contributed to this report.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061213/ap_on_go_co/johnson_6&printer=1

Dems vow change as Congress ends session By JIM ABRAMS, Associated Press Writer
2 hours, 2 minutes ago
 


WASHINGTON - The 109th session of Congress, frustrated by partisanship and criticized for its meager record of accomplishment, ended with flurry of bill-passing and promises of change when Democrats take over the House and Senate in January.

ADVERTISEMENT
 
Before the predawn finish Saturday, departing House Speaker        Dennis Hastert acknowledged that after eight years, the longest stretch for a Republican in the job, he will welcome a return to the rank and file. "On Jan. 4, I will be privileged to rejoin you on these benches where my heart is," he said,

The Illinois Republican will be succeeded on that day by Rep. Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif. She becomes the first female speaker and the first Democrat in the post since Newt Gingrich of Georgia led the Republicans to power in 1995.

Pelosi is promising that the new Democratic era will get off to a quick start with votes to raise the federal minimum wage for the first time in a decade, enact lobbying and ethics reform and lower Medicare prescription drug costs.


Rep. Jefferson wins re-election in La. By CAIN BURDEAU, Associated Press Writer
15 minutes ago
 


NEW ORLEANS - U.S. Rep. William Jefferson (news, bio, voting record) easily defeated his fellow Democratic opponent in Saturday's runoff, despite an ongoing federal bribery investigation.


http://news.yahoo.com/i/703