It must be nice never having to account for one's actions, or lack thereof. Americans are familiar with the Bush administration ignoring laws and common decency concerning foreign policy and spying on its citizens, but how can the administration get away with this tactic in the Katrina investigation?
The White House's refusal to turn over relevant documents to congressional investigators looking into the handling of Hurricane Katrina is mind-boggling. Further clouding the matter is their refusal to make senior White House officials available for sworn testimony to the Republican-led investigations.
There is no legitimate reason for the White House's stance. Its reluctance is directly tied to its efforts at limiting political fallout from mistakes. The documents can potentially provide who, what, where, when, why and how these mistakes occurred, and officials don't want the public to know this information.
It is also simply unacceptable that high-level White House officials are not testifying in the investigation. Two months after Mike Brown was forced to resign from FEMA's top job, he continued to collect a $148,000 yearly salary. Bush claimed keeping Brown on would allow for him to fully cooperate with any investigation, yet Brown is not cooperating.
The White House disingenuously claims its refusal stems from executive privilege, which covers conversations between the president and his advisors. But this is flawed reasoning. Normally, matters of executive privilege involve national security and states secrets. Exposing mistakes with the Katrina response is not only about holding people accountable; these errors need to be fixed before another natural disaster strikes.
Getting to the bottom of the White House's actions is crucial to preparing for next year's onslaught of hurricanes. A closed, insulated, Orwellian White House is again proving where its true priorities lie: protecting its own power at all costs.
Wage war victory
Businesses absorb increase while workers get much-needed help
Good for New York. In raising its minimum wage laws, the Empire State has given workers at the bottom of the earning ladder a much-needed and deserved raise. Now if only the federal government would follow suit.
Whenever minimum wage is raised, employers cry foul because of the added overhead expenses. Dire threats resound of businesses closing down and employees being let go as pro-business advocates propagandize the horrors that lie ahead in the economy.
In actuality, minorities, women, and students are the main beneficiaries of a raised minimum wage and the impact on businesses is always manageable. In fact, how they manage the increase speaks volumes for the model in which they conduct business.
At UB, the franchise-driven multinational corporation Burger King immediately raised prices and put the wage hike directly on the consumer's back. But the mom-and-pop Campus Caf?(c) utilized more creative methods in absorbing the wage hike, trying to keep their prices the same.
It's telling how Burger King reactions compare with those of Campus Caf?(c)'s. Big business professes its hands are tied while the small business employs creative capitalistic measures to better serve their needs, and their customers.
Washington should follow New York's lead in giving the little man help. Big business survives, small business makes due, and those who need help the most get it. It's win-win for all.
