Propaganda doesn’t help AmericaBy Andres Martinez

[It is] troubling to those of us who have lived in other countries and always admired the distinctive candor of public discourse in this country.

Spin is nothing new in American politics, but the Bush administration has not contented itself with trying to influence the news. It’s in the business of producing the news itself, in the hopes of passing it off as generic, third-party reporting. This is propaganda parading as journalism, in the finest PRI (or Soviet) tradition. …

This clumsy branding of George W. Bush’s vision of America to Americans will not only backfire at home, it invariably subverts efforts to brand America overseas. Public candor and transparency are supposed to be one of the American brand’s distinguishing assets. Because the administration insists on operating in its imagined version of reality, the United States and American credibility begin to look rather commonplace — and unreliable — to the world. You can imagine how many conspiracy theories are fed and validated on the streets of Cairo and Tehran when word gets out that U.S. government agencies produce their own propagandistic “news” reports.

Monday’s naming of Karen Hughes as the State Department’s global spinmeister — the undersecretary of State for public diplomacy and public affairs — should make matters worse. She is close to Bush and closely associated with his remarkably evasive communications strategy. This White House stays relentlessly on message, even if the facts mock its discipline. …

It must be tempting for the leader of the sole superpower to imagine that he can define reality and impose it on the rest of world. But it’s a dangerous temptation as the United States, for all its might, depends to an alarming degree on the trust of foreigners — increasingly the trust of a handful of Asian central banks — who are financing the nation’s rising debt. The United States borrows $2 billion a day from overseas to maintain Americans’ lavish lifestyle — a factoid you won’t hear about in any taxpayer-financed fake news report.

Foreign central banks buy U.S. currency, in the form of Treasury notes, the way you buy stock in a company. Trouble is, they also can sell it the way you can dump stock when you lose faith in a company. The plummeting dollar is a global vote of no confidence in Brand U.S.A. and its current management. This decline is likely to accelerate if the administration doesn’t begin to be more candid about the nation’s real problems, such as the government’s budgetary shortfalls, and take them on. Foreign investors don’t want to trust their money to a country governed by propagandists. That’s why they invested in the United States in the first place.

News Hounds: More Fox News Insanity

Fox airs three “business” shows on Saturday morning. I just saw a combined promo for two of tomorrow’s shows. The promo featured a picture of Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, and Ted Kennedy and the caption read: “Are Dems Trying to Destroy the Economy?”

The Money Behind the Debate Over Drilling in ANWR

Oil companies are hoping their considerable political clout, built up over years of generous campaign giving and lobbying, will put drilling in ANWR over the top. The oil and gas industry has contributed $179.7 million since 1989 to federal candidates and political parties, 74 percent to Republicans. …

Exxon Mobil is a member of Arctic Power, which bills itself as a grassroots, non-profit organization endorsed by the Alaska legislature that has been at the forefront of the ANWR drilling issue since 1992. …

Oil and gas companies have contributed $368,000 in individual and PAC contributions to Stevens since 1989, more than any other industry.

Other Alaska officials have struck it big from the industry as well.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R), who won a tight election last year, raised $195,000 from the industry in the 2004 election cycle alone, enough for a No. 10 ranking among all federal candidates. Alaska’s lone representative in the House, Don Young (R), has raised $874,000 from oil and gas interests since 1989, more than from any other industry. Murkowski and Young both support ANWR drilling. …

[Arctic Power] contends on its Web site that drilling could create as many as 736,000 jobs. Artic Power has spent $1.7 million on federal lobbying since 1997. …

The promise of new job creation has brought the International Brotherhood of Teamsters into an unusual alliance with oil companies on the subject of ANWR. The Teamsters, which have openly opposed many of Bush’s policies, broke from the heavily Democratic labor movement to support drilling.

The Teamsters are among the nation’s largest campaign donors, having contributed $21.9 million since 1989 in individual, PAC and soft money donations, 93 percent to Democrats. The union has spent $7.7 million on lobbying since 1997.

Mike Mathis, director of government affairs for the Teamsters, said the union has sent representatives to lobby new GOP members and lawmakers from labor-heavy states such as Pennsylvania. He added that the union is working to “firm up as many Democrats as we can.”

Mathis said the Teamsters have been working with Sen. Ted Stevens, an Alaska Republican who has long supported drilling. Teamsters members in Alaska also have been coordinating with Arctic Power. The union has not contributed money to the group, as it did a few years ago, but it would do so if “there was a need,” Mathis said.

[mjh: Number junkies should follow this link] Industry Totals: Oil & Gas Long-Term Contribution Trends

Gallup: Only 37% Approve of Congress, a ‘Surprising Drop’

A new Gallup Poll released today finds what Frank Newport, its director, calls a “surprising drop in Americans’ approval of the way Congress is handling its job.”

A poll completed last week found only 37% of American approve of Congress’ job performance, down from 45% just one month ago, and its lowest rating since 1999. “My guess,” Newport reports, “is that congressional approval is suffering from a generalized reaction to the bickering about Social Security.”

In the same poll, only 42% said they were “satisfied with the way things are going in the U.S.” This is down from 45% in February. A closer look finds a dramatic partisan divide, with 69% of Republicans saying they are satisfied and only 18% of Democrats.

At the same time, President Bush’s approval rating stands at 52%, the same as last month.

Asked to rank the biggest problems facing the country, 28% mentioned various economic problems, 25% the war in Iraq, 12% Social Security, and 9% terrorism or health care. Among the issues mentioned by less than 1%: the energy crisis, gay issues, abortion, racism.

The Daily Howler

Like so many other Republicans, [Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH)] was looking for a way to pretend that Social Security’s day of reckoning was disturbingly near at hand. According to the CBO, Social Security can pay full benefits through the year 2052. But it’s hard to get people worked up about that, so fakers like Gregg keep torturing facts to produce a sense of impending disaster. …

The surplus will be getting smaller each year—but duh! At this point, it will still be a surplus! In 2015, the surplus will be $85 billion, which is bigger than the surplus this year! But Gregg wanted to produce a sense of disaster. So that’s when he started to torture his facts to produce a disturbing conclusion:

GREGG: This is significant because every dollar collected in payroll taxes is spent, including the surplus. So in 2011, when budget writers are looking at the fiscal 2012 budget, they can count on less Social Security dollars to pad other spending, and the rest of the budget will begin to feel the pinch.

That means defense, education, federal highways, environmental programs—every other area of government will be impacted.

This will happen not in 2018, not in 2042, but just six years from now when Congress will have to make choices between Social Security benefits and other programs. People need to understand this reality.

“People need to understand this reality,” Gregg said—even as he did his best to confuse, mislead and scare them. …

Say what? If you know anything at all about the SS debate, you know [this] claim is inaccurate. Everyone has read, a thousand times, the current projection of the SS trustees—the payroll tax will produce an annual surplus through the year 2018. The CBO says 2020.

The Nation | Blog | The Daily Outrage | Ari Berman

Amazingly, the Governator is taking PR cues from George W. Bush.

Last week the California Governor’s office admitted to sending at least five fake news segments hyping Arnold’s policies to local TV stations under the guise of real news. The mock news spots–sent out to stations in December–promote an end to mandatory lunch breaks for workers, cuts in the number of nurses at hospitals, a revised pay scheme for teachers and stricter tenure track for professors.

Here’s the Los Angeles Times’ description of the segments: “A written introduction offers suggested opening lines to be read by television news anchors. A state employee, who previously worked as a reporter for a Sacramento television station, is the narrator. Each video includes interviews with advocates for the proposals. The tapes do not acknowledge dissenting views or offer balance as required in news accounts.”

This much secrecy fails to protect Americans By MYRIAM MARQUEZ, Orlando Sentinel

Former Attorney General John Ashcroft changed the meaning of the Freedom of Information Act from a presumption of disclosure to a rationale for secrecy. In October 2001, he advised federal agencies not to release documents to the press or the public so long as they had any possible legal rationale to keep them hidden from public view. That memo was in the works even before the terrorist attack, which should give all Americans pause.

The memo was overkill. …

Accidents are more likely than terrorist attacks on [chemical] plants. Now people are more vulnerable, not less, because they haven’t a clue what risks they face. Until it’s too late. …

Emergency response teams know what’s in a rail car by a sign that’s posted on the side of the tank car detailing the deadly chemicals it might carry. Now federal agencies are considering removing those placards from all trains as a way to “protect” the public from terrorists with devious plans.

Rail workers, firefighters and other emergency workers aren’t too happy with the proposal. Even chemical companies prefer to keep the signs in public view. …

The problem with secrecy for security’s sake is that it doesn’t protect us. It simply spares the government any accountability to the public.

If citizens can’t know what train routes carry potentially poisonous materials, which nuclear plants are vulnerable or what underground pipelines are carrying through our towns, then we have no clue if our government is indeed keeping us safer from terrorists. The real threat is using secrecy to hide public-policy decisions that are supposed to keep us safe.

It’s a delicate balancing act, and right now the scales have tipped way too far, at our peril.