Crooked lobbyist Jack Abramoff explains how he asserted his influence in Congress for years, and how such corruption continues today despite ethics reform. Lesley Stahl reports.

Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), a longtime advocate for reform of the Federal Reserve, is sharply criticizing the Federal Reserve today after Bloomberg news reported that the Federal Reserve secretly committed nearly $8 trillion in support to American and international financial institutions during the 2008 bailout. Kucinich recorded a video for his website before going to the floor of the House of Representatives to call upon Congress to reclaim its Constitution primacy over monetary policy.

More at Bloomberg.

Transcript.

The bill is officially known as the Protect Life Act, but it, sadly, restricts women’s access to reproductive health care services. Those who support the bill say it is merely changing a small part of the Affordable Care Act so that US taxpayer money will not be used to fund abortions. The fact is, this is already prohibited under the Affordable Care Act. H.R. 358 goes even farther than the Hyde Amendment as it restricts women who have have private insurance from spending their own private money on health insurance.

“Extremists prevailed today in the House of Representatives,” said Debra Ness of the National Partnership for Women and Families, “proving again that they are badly out-of-touch with the majority of Americans who want lawmakers to focus on economic recovery, jobs and promoting, rather than restricting, affordable, quality health care ­– not [on] an extreme, anti-woman agenda.”

The bill, H.R. 358, about which we have written extensively, revives the earlier failed Stupak amendment, which would force health plans to drop comprehensive coverage in state health insurance exchanges, cutting off millions of women from the benefits they receive today and prevent women from paying for health insurance with abortion coverage with their own money.

H.R. 358 contains other provisions revealing complete disregard for women’s health and lives. It permits states to enact sweeping refusal laws that would allow health plans to refuse to cover women’s preventive services, including birth control, without cost-sharing — undoing a new protection under health reform supported by 66 percent of Americans.  It also codifies and significantly expands an already expansive refusal clause (also known as the Weldon amendment) without any regard for patient rights or protections. Under current law (through the 2004 Weldon amendment), hospitals, health care facilities, and insurance plans can refuse to provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions.  The Weldon amendment has no protections for patients to ensure they have access to care and information in a timely manner.  H.R. 358 codifies this unfair and discriminatory provision.  H.R. 358 further allows health care entities–hospitals, clinics–to refuse to “participate in” abortion care.  This could mean that a hospital employee with no medical training or role in a patient’s treatment decisions could refuse to process bills, handle medical records, or even set up an examination room for a patient seeking abortion care.

And finally, it overrides protections for pregnant women under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act.  EMTALA was enacted in 1986 to ensure public access to emergency services regardless of ability to pay, including women in active labor. Under EMTALA, hospitals must stabilize a pregnant patient who, for example, is facing an emergency obstetric condition or life-threatening pregnancy and either treat her–including an emergency abortion–or if the hospital or staff objects, to transfer her to another facility that will treat her.

H.R. 358 overturns decades of precedent guaranteeing people access to lifesaving emergency care, including abortion care and says its ok that a pregnant woman fighting for her life be left to die.

The president strongly opposes H.R. 358 and it is likely to fail in the Senate, but it is important to understand that the republicans continue to push for this type of national policy. By doing so, they are telling women that they no longer matter in this world and are merely baby carriers.

You can read a summary at Edible Apple.

Here’s what he actually said.

If you want an abortion you go to Planned Parenthood and that’s well over 90% of what Planned Parenthood does.

Here’s what the Congressional Record now says.

If you want an abortion you go to Planned Parenthood and that is what Planned Parenthood does.

Here’s the video of what Senator Kyl said.

Senator Kyl can edit the Congressional Record all he wants. The major news outlets ran the story as well as The Daily Show. It’s also archived at C-SPAN. Good luck Senator. You’re going to need it.

Video is 1 hour, 1 minute long. Transcript.

The Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act, which is being pushed hard by Senator Joe Lieberman, would hand absolute power to the federal government to close down networks, and block incoming Internet traffic from certain countries under a declared national emergency.

Despite the Center for Democracy and Technology and 23 other privacy and technology organizations sending letters to Lieberman and other backers of the bill expressing concerns that the legislation could be used to stifle free speech, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee passed in the bill in advance of a vote on the Senate floor.

Dear [your Representative] :

I am a person who believes the primary role of government is to protect its citizens. That role shines beautifully throughout the Bill of Rights, a document that rightfully limits the federal government’s ability to encroach on the people. Since then many laws have acted to abridge freedom rather than preserve it. I am asking that you to proactively take a much needed step to, like the Bill of Rights before, define, for the benefit of the citizenry, an inalienable right that should not be ignored: the freedom to photograph and record on-duty law enforcement.

Nearly every police department, if not all of them, employs the use of recording devices during traffic stops by the way of dash-cam videos, in interrogation rooms, inmate telephone calls from corrections facilities, and so on. Since the camera never lies, these recordings are often used to build a case against offenders. Every action is scrutinized, allowing prosecutors to maximize the number of charges against an offender. However, when it comes to the rights of the citizens to protect themselves with an unblinking, ever-truthful record of an interaction with the police, or if a person chooses to peacefully and un-obstructively document the actions of the police, his liberty is trampled on by an officer who acts out of a desire, more often than not, to protect his own image and position rather than protecting and serving the people. Unfortunately, the occasional bullying that citizen photographers receive from law enforcement is supported by the District Attorneys who choose to prosecute such erroneous and fabricated charges as obstruction, disorderly conduct, and resisting arrest. A recent occurrence can be seen on a report from Baltimore’s WMAR: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNcDGqzAB30

I am asking you to help create parity when it comes to the rights of both law enforcement and the citizens to record one another. Citizens should be free from interference and bullying from both officers who may decide to step outside of their defined role, and from prosecutors who choose to maliciously punish individuals who want to protect themselves with a recording. Please take the lead in upholding our nation’s tradition of limiting government and protecting its citizens by authoring a bill unequivocally protecting the rights of the people to photograph law enforcement.

Thank you very much for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

[your name]

I actually email my representatives quite often. My Congressman and one Senator always call me back. Not surprisingly, Ben Nelson never calls back, but he’s an asshat who is on the opposite side from me so I don’t expect he will ever return a call. I live in a small town and I don’t think many people call, write or email. After a few months of doing this, I’ve come home with messages on my answering machine (yes, I still have a landline) to call them back.

Once, Senator Johann’s called and spoke to me for over an hour about net neutrality. Both Senator Johanns and Rep. Smith have always answered my letters, though Rep. Smith sometimes sends form letters back. I’m a registered independent in a very republican state, but I make sure my voice is heard.

It does work, though responses may vary. If enough people take the time to just write once a month, they will sit up and listen.

Only you can make your representatives pay attention and look at changing the law. If you don’t participate, you can’t blame anyone but yourself when a law comes back on you. Get writing.