Corruption issue besets House Democrats, again

from the June 06, 2007 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0606/p02s02-uspo.html

Monday's indictment of Rep. William Jefferson may revive pressure to fulfill their clean-government pledge.

By Gail Russell Chaddock Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

Washington

After winning control of the House of Representatives on a campaign to end a culture of corruption on Republican-led Capitol Hill, Democrats are scrambling to respond to a 16-count indictment against one of their own.

The federal indictment charges nine-term Rep. William Jefferson of Louisiana with racketeering, wire fraud, money laundering, conspiracy, soliciting bribes, obstruction of justice, and – a first for a member of Congress – violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which bans corporate bribery overseas.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the charges "extremely serious." If proved true, they "constitute an egregioius and unacceptable abuse of public trust and power," she said in a statement Monday.

Preempting action by the Steering Committee to strip him of his assignment on the Small Business Committee, Mr. Jefferson voluntarily stepped down Tuesday from his last remaining committee post pending, he said, the "successful conclusion" of the charges against him.

House Republican leaders, for their part, are calling for a floor vote this week on whether to refer the indictment to the House ethics committee. "If the charges against Congressman Jefferson are true, he should be expelled from the House of Representatives," said Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio, in a statement.

Responding to this GOP move, ethics committe chairwoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones said an investigative subcommittee will be formed to look into the charges against Jefferson.

The indictment comes at a tough time for Democrats. Public assessment of their performance since taking charge of Capitol Hill in January has been worsening, polls show. On Democrats' other big election issue – the war in Iraq – they disappointed antiwar activists last month by approving President Bush's war-funding request for this fiscal year.

"The Jefferson case was much less important to Democrats when they were in the minority," says Julian Zelizer, a congressional historian at Princeton University in New Jersey. "Coming after a watered-down ethics bill, the story is about failing to reform a system they promised to change."

"For those frustrated on Iraq as well, it becomes part of an ongoing story on whether the Democrats can follow through on what they promised. The ... Jefferson case is ... now part of a balancing act the Democrats are trying to do between pressure from the Congressional Black Caucus [to be fair to Jefferson] and political pressure to make sure this doesn't become the story of the month, taking attention from the war in Iraq," Mr. Zelizer adds.

An aggressive move against Jefferson by House leaders, at least now, risks alienating African-Americans in the congressional delegation and in the Democratic base. Many see Democrats as applying a double standard regarding how they treat allegations of corruption. Speaker Pelosi forced Jefferson to give up his seat on the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee but allowed Rep. Alan Mollohan (D) of West Virginia, who was also facing a federal investigation, to keep his seat on the Appropriations Committee.

"The allegations leveled against Mr. Jefferson are serious. But they are allegations and in our system must not be treated as guilt," says House majority whip James Clyburn (D) of South Carolina, a former chair of the Congressional Black Caucus. "We must allow the judicial process to run its course, after which there will be plenty enough time to express our political will."

When Democrats campaigned last year to take back the House, corruption cases were focused mainly on Republican lawmakers. In March 2006, former GOP Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham of California was sentenced to more than eight years for accepting at least $2.4 million in bribes. Rep. Tom DeLay of Texas resigned his position as majority leader in October 2005 after being indicted in Texas for fundraising violations in the 2002 campaign. In January, Rep. Bob Ney of Ohio – one of several lawmakers under investigation for ties to convicted ex-lobbyist Jack Abramoff – was jailed for trading political favors for gifts and campaign contributions.

The case against Jefferson is more extensive than expected, say legal experts. The public first learned of the case when the FBI recorded Jefferson accepting $100,000 from an informant in a sting operation in 2005. In August, agents searched Jefferson's Washington home and reported finding $90,000 of those funds in the freezer. "It's surprising to see how long the Jefferson indictment took: One would have thought that finding large amounts of money in a freezer would give you the ability to expedite an indictment," says Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University here. "The fact that Jefferson was still unindicted made people wonder whether the other potential offenders were being pursued aggressively."

"The schemes charged are complex, but the essence of this case is simple: Mr. Jefferson corruptly traded on his good office ... to enrich himself and his family through a pervasive pattern of fraud, bribery, and corruption that spanned many years and two continents," said US attorney Chuck Rosenberg on Monday.

Jefferson's lawyer, Robert Trout, says Jefferson is innocent and plans to "fight this indictment and clear his name."

"This case is very complicated and quite strong," says Melanie Sloan of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. He should resign immediately, she says.

Full HTML version of this story which may include photos, graphics, and related links

Corruption issue besets House Democrats, again

from the June 06, 2007 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0606/p02s02-uspo.html

Monday's indictment of Rep. William Jefferson may revive pressure to fulfill their clean-government pledge.

By Gail Russell Chaddock Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

Washington

After winning control of the House of Representatives on a campaign to end a culture of corruption on Republican-led Capitol Hill, Democrats are scrambling to respond to a 16-count indictment against one of their own.

The federal indictment charges nine-term Rep. William Jefferson of Louisiana with racketeering, wire fraud, money laundering, conspiracy, soliciting bribes, obstruction of justice, and – a first for a member of Congress – violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which bans corporate bribery overseas.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the charges "extremely serious." If proved true, they "constitute an egregioius and unacceptable abuse of public trust and power," she said in a statement Monday.

Preempting action by the Steering Committee to strip him of his assignment on the Small Business Committee, Mr. Jefferson voluntarily stepped down Tuesday from his last remaining committee post pending, he said, the "successful conclusion" of the charges against him.

House Republican leaders, for their part, are calling for a floor vote this week on whether to refer the indictment to the House ethics committee. "If the charges against Congressman Jefferson are true, he should be expelled from the House of Representatives," said Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio, in a statement.

Responding to this GOP move, ethics committe chairwoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones said an investigative subcommittee will be formed to look into the charges against Jefferson.

The indictment comes at a tough time for Democrats. Public assessment of their performance since taking charge of Capitol Hill in January has been worsening, polls show. On Democrats' other big election issue – the war in Iraq – they disappointed antiwar activists last month by approving President Bush's war-funding request for this fiscal year.

"The Jefferson case was much less important to Democrats when they were in the minority," says Julian Zelizer, a congressional historian at Princeton University in New Jersey. "Coming after a watered-down ethics bill, the story is about failing to reform a system they promised to change."

"For those frustrated on Iraq as well, it becomes part of an ongoing story on whether the Democrats can follow through on what they promised. The ... Jefferson case is ... now part of a balancing act the Democrats are trying to do between pressure from the Congressional Black Caucus [to be fair to Jefferson] and political pressure to make sure this doesn't become the story of the month, taking attention from the war in Iraq," Mr. Zelizer adds.

An aggressive move against Jefferson by House leaders, at least now, risks alienating African-Americans in the congressional delegation and in the Democratic base. Many see Democrats as applying a double standard regarding how they treat allegations of corruption. Speaker Pelosi forced Jefferson to give up his seat on the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee but allowed Rep. Alan Mollohan (D) of West Virginia, who was also facing a federal investigation, to keep his seat on the Appropriations Committee.

"The allegations leveled against Mr. Jefferson are serious. But they are allegations and in our system must not be treated as guilt," says House majority whip James Clyburn (D) of South Carolina, a former chair of the Congressional Black Caucus. "We must allow the judicial process to run its course, after which there will be plenty enough time to express our political will."

When Democrats campaigned last year to take back the House, corruption cases were focused mainly on Republican lawmakers. In March 2006, former GOP Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham of California was sentenced to more than eight years for accepting at least $2.4 million in bribes. Rep. Tom DeLay of Texas resigned his position as majority leader in October 2005 after being indicted in Texas for fundraising violations in the 2002 campaign. In January, Rep. Bob Ney of Ohio – one of several lawmakers under investigation for ties to convicted ex-lobbyist Jack Abramoff – was jailed for trading political favors for gifts and campaign contributions.

The case against Jefferson is more extensive than expected, say legal experts. The public first learned of the case when the FBI recorded Jefferson accepting $100,000 from an informant in a sting operation in 2005. In August, agents searched Jefferson's Washington home and reported finding $90,000 of those funds in the freezer. "It's surprising to see how long the Jefferson indictment took: One would have thought that finding large amounts of money in a freezer would give you the ability to expedite an indictment," says Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University here. "The fact that Jefferson was still unindicted made people wonder whether the other potential offenders were being pursued aggressively."

"The schemes charged are complex, but the essence of this case is simple: Mr. Jefferson corruptly traded on his good office ... to enrich himself and his family through a pervasive pattern of fraud, bribery, and corruption that spanned many years and two continents," said US attorney Chuck Rosenberg on Monday.

Jefferson's lawyer, Robert Trout, says Jefferson is innocent and plans to "fight this indictment and clear his name."

"This case is very complicated and quite strong," says Melanie Sloan of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. He should resign immediately, she says.

Full HTML version of this story which may include photos, graphics, and related links

Judge orders jail time for Libby in CIA leak case

from the June 06, 2007 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0606/p02s01-usju.html

The former White House aide was sentenced to 2-1/2 years in jail, plus a fine of $250,000.

By Peter Grier Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

Washington

US federal judge to I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby: Your lies blocked an extremely serious investigation, and as a result you will indeed go to prison.

That may be the bottom line from Tuesday's sentencing hearing for Mr. Libby, former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney.

Libby's lawyers had asked for probation for their client, who in March was convicted of lying and obstructing justice in the 2003 outing of CIA officer Valerie Plame.

Instead, US District Judge Reggie Walton sentenced Libby to 2-1/2 years in jail, plus a fine of $250,000.

"People who occupy these types of positions, where they have the welfare and security of the nation in their hands, have a special obligation to not do anything that might create a problem," said Judge Walton.

A tough sentence for Libby was unfair, his attorneys argued in court, because of the nature of the investigation into the politically charged Plame affair. Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald never proved that someone knowingly leaked to the press Ms. Plame's identity as a covert CIA employee. Indeed, no one – besides Libby – was ever charged in the case.

"The government did not establish the existence of an [underlying] offense," attorney William Jeffress said.

But the judge did not buy this line of argument. It is one thing to obstruct a petty larceny, he said. "It's another thing if you obstruct a murder investigation," said Walton.

For Libby, the outcome might have been worse. Prosecutor Fitzgerald had asked for a sentence of 30 to 37 months.

Still, the prospect of a relatively lengthy stay in jail represents a humiliating fall in stature. Libby is the highest-ranking US official to be convicted of a crime since the Iran-contra affair of the mid-1980s.

Given the opportunity to speak at his sentencing, Libby thanked Walton for his consideration throughout the trial and asked only to be judged on his whole life. He expressed no remorse about his actions – indeed, he did not refer to the actual case at all.

While the expression of remorse can lessen a sentence, Libby has also insisted that he is innocent, and he undoubtedly will appeal his conviction.

Dozens of letters from prominent people attesting to their belief in Libby's good character were entered into the record in support of his bid for probation. Among those who weighed in were former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
But in the end, they had little effect.

"Evidence in this case overwhelmingly indicated Mr. Libby's culpability," said Walton.
Wire services were used in this report.

Full HTML version of this story which may include photos, graphics, and related links

Can the religious left sway the '08 race?

from the June 06, 2007 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0606/p01s02-uspo.html

Democratic presidential candidates are speaking openly about faith, competing for 'values voters.'

By Linda Feldmann Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

Washington

John Edwards spoke about how prayer helped him get through the death of his son and his wife's cancer diagnoses. Barack Obama repeatedly invoked the biblical phrase "my brother's keeper" as he spoke about poverty and injustice. Hillary Rodham Clinton credited her faith with getting her through her husband's infidelities. [Editor's note: The original version misquoted the Bible and may have inferred that Mr. Obama did the same.]

This was no garden-variety political presentation by the top three Democratic presidential candidates Monday night on the campus of George Washington University, in the shadow of the White House. The forum, sponsored by the progressive Christian group Sojourners, represented the boldest indication yet that the "religious left" is building as a political force, no longer willing to cede "values voters" to the religious conservative movement that has long formed the activist base of the Republican Party.

The candidates' easy willingness to appear at the forum also represents a watershed for the modern Democratic Party: Intimate discussion of faith, and how it informs policy views and personal behavior, is no longer an arms-length proposition at the party's highest levels.

"It's an important strategic move for all these people – not to say their faith isn't genuine," says Jim Guth, an expert on religion and politics at Furman University in Greenville, S.C. "But I think they recognize that in a very closely divided electorate, any ability they have to peel off moderate religious conservatives or centrists, by making it clear they're comfortable with the language of faith – that's a political advantage and wise strategy and maybe good policy and good politics."

In an ironic twist – following a 2004 election in which white Evangelicals went 80 percent for the Republican, President Bush – today's top Democratic contenders may be more comfortable fielding questions on religion than today's top Republicans. On the GOP side, Rudolph Giuliani is a Roman Catholic who is on his third marriage and who takes liberal positions on social issues; John McCain is an Episcopalian, but, like Mr. Giuliani, rarely mentions his faith. Mitt Romney describes his Mormonism as central to his life, but it's a religion that leaves many voters uncomfortable – and could make him an awkward fit for conservative Evangelical voters. The three top Republicans have been invited by Sojourners to appear at a forum in September.

Still, experts on religion and politics agree that the religious left has a way to go to catch up to the religious right in organizational strength and that there are structural barriers that could prevent it from happening.

"When you look at religious progressives, generally, they come in many different varieties," says John Green, a senior fellow at the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.

Some are theological liberals who happen to be politically liberal, some are theological conservatives who happen to be politically liberal, and some are a bit of both, Mr. Green says. And they come from different backgrounds – evangelical, Catholic, mainline Protestant. So while religious conservatives can easily organize within their congregations, for the religious left it is more complicated. Also, adds Green, "people on the liberal side of these debates tend toward ecumenism and interfaith. A lot of Reform Jews might be considered part of this. Certainly, black Protestants would be part of this."

A look at the numbers also shows a religious left that is still on the beginning end of a trajectory movement leaders hope will make it a major force in shaping political and policy debate. At this week's four-day Pentecost conference sponsored by Sojourners, there are 600 people in its attendance. At its height in the mid-1990s, the Christian Coalition could summon 4,000 people to Washington for its annual convention. And while that organization has faded, the religious right's top mass gathering – now sponsored by the Family Research Council and allied groups – was able to draw 1,700 attendees to a Values Voter Summit in 2006, with another scheduled for this fall, according to Joe Conn of Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

Each side emphasizes different issues, and so the rise of one is not necessarily dependent on the decline of another. For the right, abortion and gay rights have long been the driving issues, while on the left, poverty is the top issue – and was the focus of Monday's presidential forum. The Iraq war, climate change, energy, and the environment have also grown in importance among religious liberals, and the rise of those issues in public consciousness in the past couple of years has also given religious progressives more to rally around.

On the left, many political religious activists disagree over abortion and gay rights, and so those issues are not central to the movement. The founder and organizer of Sojourners, the Rev. Jim Wallis, is an Evangelical Christian who calls himself pro-life, but it is the issues of poverty and social justice that animate him in the political sphere.

Religious conservative leaders say they welcome the rise of a religious left and see it as a validation of their own entry into politics in the 1970s, after a long period when the blending of religion and politics on the right was seen as anathema.

"I think it points to the success that Christians have had," says Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council. "It means we're no longer on the outside looking in. Faith has very much permeated the political process in this country."

But to some activists, especially those who are fighting to maintain strict separation between church and state, the growth of a religious left raises the risk that the public loses sight of the proper place of religion and faith in government.

"My concern is that merely mentioning religious matters or using religious language is not a way to run a political campaign," says the Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. "The bad news is that the religious left could begin to use religion in the same way that the religious right does…. We already have too much religious rhetoric in what should be a secular-oriented campaign."

But, he adds, it's "possible for right and left to talk about values and explain the source of their beliefs, and that's an important part of the public dialogue."

Full HTML version of this story which may include photos, graphics, and related links

In US's big presidential fields, who gets how much debate time?

from the June 07, 2007 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0607/p02s02-uspo.html

Attention on 'top tier' candidates in this week's debates prompts calls for a more evenhanded format.

By Ari Pinkus Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

Goffstown, N.H.

The presidential debates televised this week from New Hampshire are generating, well, a lot of debate.

Specifically, the amount of time the camera and the microphone went to so-called "top tier" candidates, versus lesser time for lesser-known aspirants, is prompting calls for a more equal-opportunity format at this early stage in the 2008 campaign.

The complaints might be shrugged off merely as sour grapes by less-than-leading candidates in two very crowded fields – except that political analysts, voter-turnout advocates, and voters themselves seem inclined to take their side.

"The debates were reasonable, though a disproportionate share of the attention was on the top-tier candidates," says John Pitney, a political scientist at Claremont McKenna College in Claremont, Calif., who watched them on TV. "Initially, it's of value to always give a chance to all the candidates."

Many who attended the debates, jamming into a glammed-up hockey rink at Saint Anselm College here, already have a favorite horse in the race. But for millions of Americans who tuned in on CNN, the forums may well help to form their impressions of the candidates, and the amount of camera time a candidate gets can work to subtly shape notions of who's a contender and who's not, some analysts say.

True, the sheer size of the field, eight Democrats and 10 Republicans so far, makes it hard to find a format that is both fair to candidates and relevant for voters. This week's debates allowed most candidates the opportunity to give only a bare-bones explanation of their proposals or positions on issues – even though each debate ran, without commercial interruption, for two hours.

"A minute or 30 seconds on foreign policy is a parody of what it ought to be," says Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia, who senses that viewers are feeling short-changed. "It's been more about the [CNN} anchors and reporters, and that's the problem."

In fact, CNN's Wolf Blitzer stole the show during Tuesday night's debate among the Republican hopefuls, according to a "talk clock" that tracked candidates' speaking time. Set up by the campaign of Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, who is seeking the Democratic nomination, the clock showed that Mr. Blitzer spoke for 19-1/2 minutes, compared with about 12-1/2 minutes for Sen. John McCain of Arizona and former New York Mayor Rudolph Guiliani, and 11 for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

Tommy Thompson, former secretary of Health and Human Services, didn't get his first question until about 14 minutes into the debate – and ended up with 4 minutes, 21 seconds of time total. Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee didn't speak until about 17 minutes into the event.

During the Democrats' debate on Sunday night, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois got the most time, with 16 minutes. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and former Sen. John Edwards of South Carolina also fared well, Senator Dodd's clock showed. As for Dodd himself? He got 8-1/2 minutes – about half the time of Senator Obama.

"Really nothing about the debate was equitable, from the unprecedented assignment of podiums [with Obama, Senator Clinton, and Mr. Edwards at center stage] to the allotment of time," says Dodd spokeswoman Christy Setzer. "We'll count on the DNC [Democratic National Committee] at future events to mandate some even-handedness."

CNN defended its handling of the debates, including its decision to place at center stage the three candidates with the highest poll numbers or biggest war chests.

"The candidate positions [on stage] were selected based on television angles. CNN felt most questions from the other [Democratic] candidates would be directed at Clinton, Edwards, and Obama, so the decision was made to place them in the center," the network said in a statement. It handled the Republican debate similarly, placing Messrs. Guiliani and Romney and Senator McCain in the middle.

Some analysts disagreed with that decision.

"I give them credit for using their judgment, but it sent a signal: Only pay attention to the center of the stage," says Dr. Sabado. "It's damaging to the network. They need to realize that viewers believe they have hidden preferences."

What kind of format would better serve voters?

Sabado suggests scheduling a series of debates, with only four or five candidates at each one, and the candidates at each one selected by a lottery system. He'd also like to see candidates ask questions of other candidates.

Dr. Pitney at Claremont McKenna College concurs that presidential debates with fewer candidates would be more revealing and would lead to much more information for voters.
"The campaign itself may solve the [debates] problem," he adds, as candidates drop out and the fields winnow.

Mike Biundo, a senior adviser to the Thompson campaign, feels Tuesday's debate was "very unfair as far as the time allotment," but says there's not much to be done about it.

For lesser-known candidates like Mr. Thompson, the answer is grass-roots campaigning in New Hampshire, he suggests.

"We're sitting in the first-in-the-nation primary state that prides itself on the ability of all candidates have access ... to voters," says Mr. Biundo.

Full HTML version of this story which may include photos, graphics, and related links

Immigration divides GOP

from the June 08, 2007 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0608/p01s02-uspo.html

Republican presidential hopefuls show little party unity over the immigration bill in the Senate.

By Ariel Sabar Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

Washington

The immigration debate roiling Congress has spilled over onto the presidential campaign trail, exposing rifts among Republican candidates and triggering a round of intraparty crossfire that analysts say is splintering the GOP.

The divisions were on stark display at the Republican debate Tuesday night. Sen. John McCain of Arizona, an author of the Senate immigration compromise backed by the Bush administration, called immigrants "God's children" and defended what he said was a practical plan to secure borders while laying a path to citizenship for the country's 12 million illegal immigrants.

But the measure drew attacks from other Republican hopefuls, who described the plan as a threat, by turns, to national security, the rule of law, and American culture.

The internecine sparring has vexed conservative leaders, who worry that it could fragment a party saddled with an unpopular president and struggling for traction against resurgent Democrats.

"Just as the Democrats are having an internal war on the issue of Iraq, the immigration issue is doing the same to the Republican Party: It's tearing the party in two," says Brian Darling, director of Senate relations for the conservative Heritage Foundation, which has criticized the legislation.

A CBS News/New York Times poll last month found Republicans almost evenly split over President Bush's immigration plan, with 41 percent in favor and 47 percent against. Bipartisan versions of the measure before the Senate would establish a guest-worker program for short stays, an admission point-system that favors high-skilled immigrants, and "Z visas" that let illegal immigrants apply for legal status after paying fines, passing background checks, and learning English.

A fragmented base

In part, some analysts say, the strains over the legislation reflect tensions between two pillars of the Republican base – working-class white voters who may see illegal immigrants as competition for jobs and business leaders who have grown dependent on large pools of low-wage workers.

"What's at stake is nothing less than the future of the party," says Tamar Jacoby, a backer of the Senate measure and senior fellow at The Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank. "There are far too many Republicans worried about the 10 to 20 percent of voters who are adamantly anti-immigrant – the Lou Dobbs voter," she says, referring to the host of the CNN series "Broken Borders."

McCain, who represents a border state with a population that is 29 percent Hispanic, found himself in a lonely minority at Tuesday's debate. Of the 10 men on stage, only Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas explicitly endorsed parts of his plan.

"The problem with this immigration plan is it has no real unifying purpose," former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani said. "It's a typical Washington mess."

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney called the bill a form of amnesty "unfair to the millions and millions of people around the world that would love to come here."

And Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado, who earlier announced a "Save America Campaign" to drive the measure's supporters from office, said the legislation would prove "disastrous" for a country unable to absorb more immigrants. "How long will it take for us to catch up with the millions of people who have come here, both legally and illegally, and assimilate them?" he asked.

"It'll take this long: until we no longer have to press 1 for English and 2 for any other language," he said, to applause from the audience of undecided Republican and independent voters at Saint Anselm College, in Manchester, N.H.

McCain's recent exchanges with Republican colleagues have been particularly caustic. When Sen. John Cornyn of Texas accused him last month of shirking negotiations over the bill in favor of the campaign trail, McCain reportedly said, "I know more about this issue than anyone here in the room."

A few days later, McCain assailed Romney, one of his chief critics, suggesting the former governor "get out his small-varmint gun and drive those Guatemalans off his yard," a reference to reports that the former governor had hired – unwittingly, Romney later said – undocumented workers to landscape his Boston home.

McCain kept up the offensive Monday in a speech in south Florida, praising the immigrant-rich region as a "living testament to the benefits of immigration" and accusing critics of inaction. "Pandering for votes on this issue, while offering no solution to the problem, amounts to doing nothing. And doing nothing is silent amnesty."

Romney opposes citizenship for illegal immigrants already in the US and favors a plan stressing border security and worker ID cards that employers would be required to check against a federal database to verify immigration status.

The political gamble

Campaign handicappers say political leaders' opposition to the immigration measure is a gamble over the long term, not least because of the growing political muscle of the Hispanic population.
"My sense is that the Romney strategy is probably a better strategy for the caucus and the nomination process, but the McCain strategy is one that would play better in the general election," says Steffen Schmidt, a political scientist at Iowa State University.

Conservative ire over the Senate immigration measure is a "real gift to aspiring Republicans," says Prof. Roger Robins of Marymount College, in California.

With the immigration bill, "they get to bash Bush and play to the Republican base," he said. "But the price is overall party unity."

Full HTML version of this story which may include photos, graphics, and related links

How to revive immigration bill

from the June 11, 2007 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0611/p03s02-uspo.html

The onus is on Bush to convince critics that the US is serious about border enforcement.

By Gail Russell Chaddock Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

Washington

For immigration reform to get back on track on Capitol Hill, President Bush needs to convince skeptics on both sides of the aisle that the government can be trusted to enforce the law.

The Senate's "grand bargain" on immigration fell 15 votes short in a key procedural vote Thursday night, and majority leader Harry Reid pulled the bill off the floor.

To bring it back, Senate Republicans must reduce the number of amendments they are proposing. That can be done, said Republican leaders last week. If they do, "we'll find time to get this bill out," Senator Reid said after the vote.

But behind these procedural roadblocks is a deep settled conviction by opponents both on Capitol Hill and among the general public that the federal government lacks the will to enforce America's immigration laws.

"The public has a right to ask this these questions – and to be cynical – and we have to overcome that with this legislation," says Sen. Jon Kyl (R) of Arizona, the lead Republican sponsor of the "grand bargain" on immigration reform.

The last major immigration law, in 1986, gave amnesty to illegal immigrants – and promised border enforcement and sanctions on employers who hire undocumented workers, but did not deliver. The proposed new immigration law includes measures such as an electronic employee verification system to ensure that workers are legal. "That's been lost in the press coverage and the debate on the bill," Senator Kyl says.

In a radio address responding to last week's vote, Mr. Bush acknowledged that the 1986 immigration law failed, but said that the current bill can be improved.

"I know some of you doubt that the federal government will make good on the border security and enforcement commitments in this bill," he said. "My administration is determined to learn from the mistakes of the past decades."

Unlike the 1986 law, the current bill includes a temporary worker program "to ensure that those who come here to work do so in a legal and orderly way," he said. It will give "honest employers the tools they need to ensure that they are hiring legal workers," including a tamper-resistant identity card.

"Businesses that knowingly hire illegal aliens will be punished. Workers who come here illegally will be sent home," he said. Bush will be meeting in a closed session with Senate Republicans at their caucus luncheon on Tuesday.

But opponents say that two weeks of debate and roll call votes over amendments to this bill signal deep rifts over how far Washington should go to enforce the law.

By a vote of 48 to 49, the Senate voted down an amendment by Rep. Norm Coleman (R) of Minnesota that would have allowed local law-enforcement officials to question individuals about their immigration status if they have probable cause to believe that the immigrants are not in the country legally. Nine Democrats and all but eight Republicans supported the amendment.

An amendment by Sen. David Vitter (R) of Louisiana requiring Washington to track whether visitors left the US after their visas expired also failed by a vote of 48 to 49, with 12 Democrats voting in support.

A new report by the Congressional Budget Office estimates that a half-million guest workers will overstay their visas in the next decade, if the new law is enacted. "We anticipate that many of those would remain in the US after their visas expire," the report concluded.

In another key vote, senators also voted down an amendment by Sen. John Cornyn (R) of Texas to exclude felons from the Z-visa program, which offers a path to legalization for some 12 million now in the country illegally. The amendment, which was rejected 46 to 51, would have excluded those who forged documents or ignored deportation orders – a provision that could have left out many undocumented workers.

Another Republican amendment requiring that information on Z-visa applications be disclosed to local law enforcement was adopted 57 to 39, but sponsors say that the risk of legal reprisals would discourage many undocumented immigrants from applying to legalize their status. They say the amendment must be "fixed" before the bill becomes a law.

That pattern of votes shows that Congress isn't yet serious about border enforcement, says Sen. Jeff Sessions (R) of Alabama, a lead opponent of the bill.

Along with GOP conservatives, the 11 Democrats who helped derail the bill Thursday also voted consistently to strengthen enforcement.

"We can stop the hiring of illegal immigrants in this country if we prosecute the people who are hiring them. This administration has not been interested in enforcing the law against employers," said Sen. Claire McCaskill (D) of Missouri, during the debate on Thursday.

Recent polls also signal that doubts about Washington's commitment to enforcing immigration laws is draining support for the bill. Only 16 percent of Americans believe that the Senate bill will reduce illegal immigration and enforce the border, according to a recent Rasmussen Reports national poll. A New York Times/CBS News poll released May 24 found that 69 percent of Americans say that those in the country illegally should be prosecuted and deported.

"There is a lot of distrust of Washington in general. That explains those polls that say: Do you support the Senate immigration bill? No. Do you know what's in it? No," says Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, which lobbies for immigration reform.

Full HTML version of this story which may include photos, graphics, and related links

Sound lands on Google Earth

from the June 05, 2007 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0605/p20s01-stct.html

Bernie Krause teaches the world to listen – not just to a few bird chirps, but the whole environmental symphony.

By Ray Sikorski Contributor to The Christian Science Monitor

Glen Ellen, Calif.

In the living room of bioacoustician Bernie Krause's California wine country home, a reporter's click on a Google Earth computer image of Antarctica produces a sound so foreign, there seems no possible way it could emanate from this planet.

But Dr. Krause, who has spent the past 40 years collecting sounds from around the globe, explains that the clicks, chirps, and howling ethereal decrescendos are indeed from this planet: They're made by Weddell seals inhabiting the frozen continent's McMurdo Sound.

"You know what they're doing?" asks Krause, suddenly animated. "They're imitating thunderstorms at the equator." He explains the theory that the seals use their skulls to pick up the electrical energy of thunderstorms transmitted through the earth's magnetic field from half a world away.

"They're social animals," he says. "They do that over long stretches of open water."

The aquatic discourse is among the 30-plus sounds now available as "The Wild Soundscape Tour," a free add-on layer to Google Earth, the downloadable navigation tool that allows users to scan the planet using steerable satellite images. Through Krause's WildSanctuary.com website, one can now not only see the Amazonian rain forest, but hear the monkeys, jaguars, birds, and musical frogs that call it home. The same goes for the inhabitants of the wild places of Zimbabwe, Costa Rica, Madagascar, Indonesia, and Yellowstone National Park, as well as the not-so-wild urban soundscapes of New York, London, Paris, and Lisbon.

"You can immediately hear a difference between the places," says 30 Proof Media creative director Jesse Evans, explaining that police sirens and even just the traffic set the cities apart. "Once you start paying attention to it, you hear it immediately," says Mr. Evans, who with his brother/partner, Sam Evans, created the sound-embedding program.

Any programmer can add a layer of data, known as a KML layer, to the Google Earth program; in the case of The Wild Soundscape Tour, Google was impressed enough to give 30 Proof access to one of its developers to assist the project.

"When we see such truly spectacular KML layers, we do reach out with advice and support," says Megan Quinn, a Google spokesperson.

***

Paying attention to what people hear has become Krause's mission in life. Raised in Detroit, Krause moved to New York City to seek fame and fortune as a musician, and played for a time with the folk group The Weavers. He became better known for his pioneering work with the Moog synthesizer, teaming with Paul Beaver to put out "The Nonesuch Guide to Electronic Music." A 1968 collaboration with Mr. Beaver called "Into a Wild Sanctuary" focused on ecology by creating an album of natural sounds.

"By natural sound I'm talking about the entire soundscape, not separating out signature animals like wolves, a bird or two, or whales. That was a big shift in musical concept, which nobody got until..." Krause pauses to think. "They're just beginning to get it now."

In that early natural sound endeavor, Krause ventured from his San Francisco base to Muir Woods, Baker Beach, Fisherman's Wharf, and the San Francisco Zoo. "Having to record outside, and work in the natural world for the first time, I was terrified, actually [of what may have been lurking there]," he confesses. "But having to do that for the album changed my life, as soon as I turned on the recorder and heard that sound."

He says the sounds of birds and the wind in the trees relaxed him, and he realized there was nothing to fear at all.

Krause continued to record, ranging farther afield; first to California's Sierra Nevada and Trinity Mountains, and later to Alaska, Latin America, Indonesia, and Africa, giving up traditional music and getting a PhD in bioacoustics.

"I was aware of this kind of atavistic relationship, a sense of experiencing a distant past, not only in my life, but in human life," he says, referring to a feeling of a deep genetic connection between humans and the natural world that was triggered by sound.

Krause's recording of "biophonies," the combined sounds that whole groups of living organisms produce, consumed him, he says, "to the point where I was working with mountain gorillas in Dian Fossey's camp, slept with them in their nests."

In 1985 Krause did gain some fame for using his recordings of humpback whale feeding sounds and social noises to help lure Humphrey, a humpback that had swam up California's Sacramento River, back to the ocean. Krause was called back to action a few weeks ago, when an injured mother and calf humpback found themselves in the same predicament. Again, Krause – who had been dubbed the "whale whisperer" – arrived on the scene with his recordings. But the whales didn't respond, and his recordings were abandoned in favor of banging on pipes to frighten the mammals back to sea.

"These are wild animals. If we have human expectations that anything we try is gonna work, or one of the things we try is gonna work, we're gonna be very disappointed."

The whales returned to the ocean of their own accord.

Krause's archive, believed to be the largest privately held collection of natural sounds in the world, now boasts 3,500 hours of soundscapes from more than 1,200 habitats, encompassing 15,000 species. His Wild Sanctuary company records marine and terrestrial life from pole to pole, providing sounds for film, music for download, and sound installations for museums, zoos, and aquariums.

Of course, it's not the safest job in the world. Krause has tales of warding off a polar bear with a flare gun, of a killer whale leaping onto the ice next to him to pounce on a penguin, of a gorilla tossing him 15 feet into stinging nettles, and of a grizzly bear engulfing Krause's microphone in his mouth. ("So I have the only surround recording of what it's like to be in a bear's mouth," he says.)

Wild Sanctuary's ambitious Google Earth undertaking holds the prospect of focusing millions of primarily urban Google Earth users on the natural world. When a user clicks on a soundscape icon at earth.wildsanctuary.com, a box pops up with field notes describing the location, when the recording was made, weather conditions, and the sources of several of the sounds. Some, such as a recording made north of California's Lake Tahoe, come with before-and-after recordings – in this case recordings taken before and after selective logging took place at the spot in the late 1980s. Krause returned to the meadow 15 times after the logging. A gurgling brook takes center stage to a background cast of birds in the "before" recording; "after" reveals little life at all.

"Forty percent of my library is from now-extinct habitats. That's in my working lifetime," Krause says, who preparing for a trip to Alaska's Katmai National Park to record grizzly bears.
His goal is to get people to reconsider a culture in which noise equates with power, in favor of one in which people value the importance of natural sounds in their own lives.

"If you listen, and listen right, it changes your concept of time. You can't hear it in a four-frame cut, like we're used to.... You have to spend the time out there to engage and hear that...." he pauses to listen to the distinct, intermittent click coming from just outside his recording studio, "...the click of the oakworm out there."

Krause notes that there's a healing quality to what he refers to as the "voice of the divine" in natural sound – but it won't come to those used to instant gratification.

"You have to spend time hearing the whole call of a bird, which may take 45 seconds, or the song of a whale, which may take 45 minutes. Or to hear a series of repeated calls in a rain forest – it may take 30 hours. So your time changes, your whole sense of cycles changes, and you become more connected to the natural world around you and your own cycles of health and awareness. Which are more natural.

"And, he says, "it makes you feel better."

Full HTML version of this story which may include photos, graphics, and related links

Brazil eyes ethanol as fast track to power

from the June 06, 2007 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0606/p06s02-woam.html

Brazil aims to double its production of ethanol in 10 years as the high price of oil and growing concerns over climate change spark a demand for biofuels.

By Sara Miller Llana Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

SÃo Paulo, Brazil

Flying over the heart of Brazil, a vast savannah known as the cerrado here, one could be forgiven for mistaking the setting for Iowa, Kansas, or virtually anywhere along the US farm belt.

Neat acres of cotton, corn, and soybean extend into the horizon, and even American farmers have arrived to join a boom that over the past few years has positioned Brazil to overtake the US as the world's agricultural superpower.

Last year, Brazil surpassed the US as the largest exporter of soybeans. That followed its scoring the No. 1 spot in beef exports in 2004. And now, as the high price of oil and concerns over climate change spark global demand for alternative fuels, Brazil is aiming to double its production of sugarcane for ethanol in the next decade. As investors flock to this colossal country with its ideal growing climate, Brazil is hoping ethanol will help speed its sluggish rise as an economic power.

"Brazil has already consolidated its position as the agriculture supplier of the world," says Andre Nassar, general manager of the Institute for International Trade Negotiations (ICONE) in São Paulo, Brazil. "Now I think the Brazilian government sees ethanol as an instrument to make other countries pay attention to us, as a supplier of both food and energy."

Brazil's clout has been on display this week during President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva's three-day trip to India, where the two countries announced plans to quadruple trade to $10 billion by 2010 and boost India's use of biofuels. The two rising economic powers also aimed to enhance cooperation as a strong voice of the developing world before heading into talks at the Group of Eight (G-8) summit in Germany this week.

Brazil's clout in trade talks

The European Union has invited Brazil, India, and the US to meet in Germany later this month to attempt to hash out a deal on World Trade Organisation (WTO) negotiations. Launched in 2001, the WTO's Doha round of talks aims to break down trade barriers that hinder the economic progress of poor countries.

As Brazil's agribusiness has boomed, it has won important trade cases against the US, including the scrapping of cotton subsidies, and has led a coalition of developing nations against US subsidies in general and European tariffs within the Doha round. "Their cohesiveness arguably may be the one thing that can turn this round of negotiations into something favorable for developing countries," says Sandra Polaski, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

The country's rise as the world's "breadbasket" – a transformation made possible by an abundance of land and sun, decades of money pumped into research, and growing demand from developing countries such as India and China – has implications for the face of world agriculture. Today Brazil is the world's largest exporter of sugar, beef, poultry meat, coffee, orange juice, and tobacco.

In March, Lula signed a proposal with President Bush to promote the ethanol industry in the region.

The prospect for an international ethanol market is still uncertain, but if it does transpire Brazil would most certainly be a central global supplier – even as domestic demand goes up. Its ethanol production is far more efficient than that of the US, which makes ethanol with corn.

"They cannot ignore us anymore, and that has given us power. You can't make decisions without the world's largest producer," says Pedro de Camargo Neto, a former official in the agriculture ministry in Brazil. "The byproduct is it makes us a political leader. Ethanol will help that."
Brazil did its homework ...

Over the past couple of decades, Brazil – in a conscious decision to focus on agriculture instead of just industry – has invested billions of dollars into a premier research institute called Embrapa. It has, among other technological advances, figured out how to grow soy varieties in tropical climates.

Its agricultural exports to China grew by 22 percent between 2005 and 2006, according to Brazil's Agricultural Ministry. Exports of soybean to China alone rose to 11 million tons in 2006 from 7 million tons a year earlier.

"Brazil owes its [position] to long-lasting and continuous research efforts toward technology in growing tropical crops. With ethanol, it is the same," says Decio Zylbersztajn, an agricultural economist at the University of São Paulo.

Their success has irked some in the American farming industry, as Brazil gains market share in traditional American domains, such as soybeans. Perhaps the unease is best exemplified in a presentation by the Iowa Farm Bureau Federation. "Should Brazil Give You Heartburn?" the Power-Point presentation is titled – with 56 slides highlighting Brazil's advantages and then all its drawbacks.

... but its climb won't be easy

Chief among Brazil's challenges is a lack of infrastructure. A report from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) showed that only 10 percent of the country's roads are paved. That contributes to high transport costs for soybean exports, for example – double what they are in the US, according to the US Department of Agriculture.

And while anxieties abroad abound, they do at home, too – particularly on the environmental front. Much of the deforestation in the past few years has taken place in the Mato Grosso, the heart of soybean production in Brazil. And as sugar production expands and moves to the cerrado, they worry that soy production will get pushed deeper into rainforest areas.

"Brazil needs to decide just how much it's willing to sacrifice of its natural resources to help other countries with their energy needs and with their soybean needs," says Randy Curtis, an expert in Latin America infrastructure at The Nature Conservancy.

Brazil's agribusiness sector accounted for 28 percent of the country's GDP, and employs 37 percent of the labor force, according to the USDA. Still, some wonder if the boom has benefited Brazil, or just big multinationals that swooped in after Brazil's economy opened in the 1990s. Many small, subsistence farmers have been displaced.

"It doesn't help Brazil, it helps the people who own the companies," says Dennis Keeney, a senior fellow with the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. "It doesn't really filter down."

But Mr. Nassar says that while these questions are important, greater prosperity via agriculture will benefit all. "Many of these regions are very underdeveloped. Now there is new employment," he says. That is leveling the field between the wealthier coastal area and inland. "By developing the agriculture sector we are also developing the country."

Full HTML version of this story which may include photos, graphics, and related links

Sooty vessels try to turn green

from the June 07, 2007 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0607/p02s01-sten.html

With pollution in ports a key contributor to US emissions, ferries and other harbor vessels look for new ways to operate.

By Ron Scherer Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

New York

On its way to the Statue of Liberty, the Miss Freedom backs away from the pier with white smoke spewing from its twin smokestacks. Then, as the captain turns out to the harbor, yet more soot streams out of the stacks.

But by the end of next year, the 3.5 million people who board the ferries annually to visit Lady Liberty may have another sight: a trimaran that can use the wind, turning on solar-charged electric motors when it's at the dock. "What someone will see when the boat is at the pier is nothing – no soot, no white smoke, nothing," says Robert Dane, CEO of Solar Sailor, the designer in Sydney, Australia.

Cutting pollution on the waterfront is an important part of the effort to cut smog and greenhouse-gas emissions. According to New York City's estimate, waterborne transportation represents 8 percent of its overall emissions. It's far higher in California, where commercial oceangoing vessels are responsible for about 80 percent of emissions of sulfur oxides and almost 13 percent of the nitrogen oxides emitted by mobile sources in the state, according to estimates by the Air Resources Board.

That's one reason that ferry services around the nation are looking for new ways to operate. The changes are important because ferries are a high-profile form of transportation, carting both tourists and commuters. In essence, they can become "floating billboards" for what can be done.
"What better way to reduce emission than using cleaner, renewable energy out on the water?" says Teri Shore of Friends of the Earth in San Francisco. "Clearly, diesel ferries need to be cleaned up."

In fact, starting last Friday, the US Environmental Protection Agency is requiring refiners to provide ultralow sulfur diesel for harbor vessels, such as tugs and ferries. This is expected to cut emissions from about 3,000 parts per million to a maximum of 500 parts per million. By 2012, the EPA will require that marine engines be designed so that total emissions are 15 parts per million or less.

"When you pair the clean diesel with a clean engine, you get an even more dramatic pollution reduction," says John Millett, a spokesman for the EPA.

For some, the EPA standards are only a starting point. For example, the San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Authority has contracted for two ferries that are required to be 85 percent better than the EPA requirement. On Wednesday, it asked boat builders to bid on yet two more of the vessels.

The authority is leaving it up to boat builders to find the best way to reduce emissions. "If they don't meet the standards, we reject them," says Mary Culnane, manager of marine engineering for the authority.

Washington State, which operates the largest ferry system in the US, will switch over to ultralow sulfur diesel fuel by the end of this year. In the past, it tried using biodiesel but found its fuel filters were getting clogged very quickly, says Jonathan Olds, environmental program manager for Washington State Ferries.

"We're beginning a study to find out what went wrong and hope by the beginning of next year to have the biodiesel back on the ferries," says Mr. Olds. "One of the things we hope to come out of this is maritime biodiesel standards."

In Fort Lauderdale, Fla., Water Taxi Inc., which builds such vessels, is producing the maritime equivalent of an automobile hybrid. "Initially, we wanted a pure hybrid situation using high-tech batteries," says Bob Bekoff, the president. But after almost all those scenarios failed, he's shifted over to a combination of diesel and battery power. The fuel savings are about 50 percent, estimates Mr. Bekoff.

In March, Seattle-based Foss Maritime Co. said it would build the first hybrid tugboat. The vessel will work in southern California as part of a plan to clean up air quality at Los Angeles-area ports.

But the most unusual-looking vessels are probably the hybrids for the Statue of Liberty, which are designed to use solar and wind energy as well as diesel.

Other harbors may be following suit. Two years ago, the National Park Service gave "points" to companies that used green technology in bids to take passengers to Alcatraz Island in San Francisco Bay. The winning company, Alcatraz Cruises, a division of Hornblower Marine, expects to begin service at the end of 2008.

Terry MacRae, Hornblower's CEO, thinks the Solar Sailor concept is of use for only certain kinds of routes. "The technology is very expensive," he adds.

Yet however clean the ferries get, federal legislation may still be needed to clean up pollution from foreign-flagged ships. According to the US Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works, many large oceangoing vessels burn fuel with a sulfur content of 27,000 parts per million.

On May 24, Sens. Barbara Boxer (D) and Dianne Feinstein (D), both of California, introduced legislation that would require vessels entering US waters to burn fuel with a sulfur content of 1,000 parts per million, unless the EPA says the technology for that is not available. Then, vessels would be allowed to burn oil with 2,000 parts per million.

The World Shipping Council, which represents many international ocean carriers, says it would prefer to see a global solution instead of unilateral rules. It says it is not opposed to tightening the standards. "There is currently in London a major effort to upgrade current standards, and the US has an aggressive proposal – similar to the Boxer legislation – in that process," says Don O'Hare, vice president of the council in Washington.

Full HTML version of this story which may include photos, graphics, and related links

In rural America, community philanthropy thrives

from the May 24, 2007 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0524/p03s01-ussc.html

Enthusiasm for rural giving springs in part from concern for the future of small towns.

By Richard Mertens Contributor to The Christian Science Monitor

Rockville, Ind.

One woman left $500,000 to keep graveyards tidy. Another left more than $250,000 to send fourth-graders on field trips. Then there was Beatrice Collings, a widow with no children. When she died she left farmland worth $1.5 million for college scholarships.

"[Beatrice] had always wanted a college education, but never had the opportunity to get one herself," says Bradley Bumgardner, executive director of the Parke County Community Foundation.

The beneficiaries of bequests from Ms. Collings and others are the people and institutions of Parke County in Indiana, a place where covered bridges probably outnumber traffic lights and where more than a quarter of children here in Rockville, the county seat, grow up below the poverty level.

Parke County may be rural and poor, but it is no laggard in charitable giving. Thanks to Collings and many other donors, the Parke County Community Foundation is able to spend more than $500,000 a year on cemetery maintenance, scholarships for 100 students, field trips, and more: food pantry meals, handicapped entrances for churches, and this year, antique-looking streetlights along the main highway through Rockville.

Parke County is among a growing number of small towns and rural counties that are establishing foundations and asking local people to give to them.

"Community philanthropy is growing by leaps and bounds in rural areas," says Janet Topolsky, director of the Aspen Institute's Community Strategies Group, which promotes rural philanthropy in the United States and abroad. A 2004 survey found that rural foundations had more than doubled over the six previous years, she says. "A lot of it has come from the energy of local activists seeing other communities and saying, 'We can do it, too.' "

Enthusiasm for rural giving springs in part from concern for the future of places like Parke County. As manufacturers decamp and the number of farmers dwindles, many communities are searching for ways to survive and prosper. Persuading residents to give back to their communities, especially when they draw up their wills, is a leading strategy.

"We're in an era when federal and state money for rural development has really declined," says Don Macke, codirector of the Center for Rural Entrepreneurship in Lincoln, Neb. "That means if communities are going to develop, they need to find money locally."

Making the matter more urgent are "transfer of wealth" studies that show wealth in rural hometowns is slipping away. As the rural population gets older, elderly residents are increasingly transferring their assets to children who have moved to distant cities, experts say. Rural foundations hope to capture a small share of these transfers – estimated at $50 million a year in many rural counties – for the benefit of local schools, community centers, day cares, and other civic organizations.

In some rural communities local philanthropy has deep roots. The Indianapolis-based Lilly Endowment launched an effort in 1990 to establish community foundations in each of Indiana's 92 counties. Many have flourished. But in other states, rural foundations are just starting. The Nebraska Community Foundation has spawned 100 community affiliates, most within the past five years. Dozens of small foundations have sprung up in Iowa after the state began sharing its casino earnings with counties that set up foundations and offering tax credits to residents who give to them.

Rural foundations are also meeting the needs of their community's population changes. In Indiana's Noble County, the local foundation is responding to an influx of Hispanic residents by sponsoring adult language classes, diversity education in schools, and an annual ethnic festival.
For many foundations, the most pressing need is to help make the community more attractive to young families. "How can we retain younger people and keep them from leaving Iowa?" says Ashley Canney, director of affiliates at the Greater Des Moines Community Foundation.

The challenge goes beyond providing jobs. Jeffrey Yost, president and CEO of the Nebraska Community Foundation, says much rural infrastructure – schools, libraries, swimming pools, community centers – dates from periods of greater government largess and is aging.

Foundations also face the difficulty of changing the patterns of charitable giving in rural America. Rural Nebraskans are "incredibly generous" but give mainly to churches, says Mr. Yost. "We're talking to people about keeping up this ethic of giving, but have you thought of these other things?"

But the greatest challenge may be to inspire hope for a brighter future. "The crisis is not a lack of capital," says Yost. "The crisis is a crisis of hope, of having a more optimistic outlook."

Advocates of rural philanthropy are counting on one advantage: the attachment of many longtime rural residents to their communities. They are thinking of people like Marjorie Hays, a widow and retired nurse who is a founder of and leading contributor to the Parke County foundation.

"When my late husband and I came here, we didn't have anything," she says. "We had three little kids. Both of us worked hard for what we had. Even though I wasn't born here, it was my home. It means a lot to me."

Full HTML version of this story which may include photos, graphics, and related links

Corruption issue besets House Democrats, again

from the June 06, 2007 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0606/p02s02-uspo.html

Monday's indictment of Rep. William Jefferson may revive pressure to fulfill their clean-government pledge.

By Gail Russell Chaddock Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

Washington

After winning control of the House of Representatives on a campaign to end a culture of corruption on Republican-led Capitol Hill, Democrats are scrambling to respond to a 16-count indictment against one of their own.

The federal indictment charges nine-term Rep. William Jefferson of Louisiana with racketeering, wire fraud, money laundering, conspiracy, soliciting bribes, obstruction of justice, and – a first for a member of Congress – violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which bans corporate bribery overseas.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the charges "extremely serious." If proved true, they "constitute an egregioius and unacceptable abuse of public trust and power," she said in a statement Monday.

Preempting action by the Steering Committee to strip him of his assignment on the Small Business Committee, Mr. Jefferson voluntarily stepped down Tuesday from his last remaining committee post pending, he said, the "successful conclusion" of the charges against him.

House Republican leaders, for their part, are calling for a floor vote this week on whether to refer the indictment to the House ethics committee. "If the charges against Congressman Jefferson are true, he should be expelled from the House of Representatives," said Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio, in a statement.

Responding to this GOP move, ethics committe chairwoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones said an investigative subcommittee will be formed to look into the charges against Jefferson.

The indictment comes at a tough time for Democrats. Public assessment of their performance since taking charge of Capitol Hill in January has been worsening, polls show. On Democrats' other big election issue – the war in Iraq – they disappointed antiwar activists last month by approving President Bush's war-funding request for this fiscal year.

"The Jefferson case was much less important to Democrats when they were in the minority," says Julian Zelizer, a congressional historian at Princeton University in New Jersey. "Coming after a watered-down ethics bill, the story is about failing to reform a system they promised to change."

"For those frustrated on Iraq as well, it becomes part of an ongoing story on whether the Democrats can follow through on what they promised. The ... Jefferson case is ... now part of a balancing act the Democrats are trying to do between pressure from the Congressional Black Caucus [to be fair to Jefferson] and political pressure to make sure this doesn't become the story of the month, taking attention from the war in Iraq," Mr. Zelizer adds.

An aggressive move against Jefferson by House leaders, at least now, risks alienating African-Americans in the congressional delegation and in the Democratic base. Many see Democrats as applying a double standard regarding how they treat allegations of corruption. Speaker Pelosi forced Jefferson to give up his seat on the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee but allowed Rep. Alan Mollohan (D) of West Virginia, who was also facing a federal investigation, to keep his seat on the Appropriations Committee.

"The allegations leveled against Mr. Jefferson are serious. But they are allegations and in our system must not be treated as guilt," says House majority whip James Clyburn (D) of South Carolina, a former chair of the Congressional Black Caucus. "We must allow the judicial process to run its course, after which there will be plenty enough time to express our political will."

When Democrats campaigned last year to take back the House, corruption cases were focused mainly on Republican lawmakers. In March 2006, former GOP Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham of California was sentenced to more than eight years for accepting at least $2.4 million in bribes. Rep. Tom DeLay of Texas resigned his position as majority leader in October 2005 after being indicted in Texas for fundraising violations in the 2002 campaign. In January, Rep. Bob Ney of Ohio – one of several lawmakers under investigation for ties to convicted ex-lobbyist Jack Abramoff – was jailed for trading political favors for gifts and campaign contributions.

The case against Jefferson is more extensive than expected, say legal experts. The public first learned of the case when the FBI recorded Jefferson accepting $100,000 from an informant in a sting operation in 2005. In August, agents searched Jefferson's Washington home and reported finding $90,000 of those funds in the freezer. "It's surprising to see how long the Jefferson indictment took: One would have thought that finding large amounts of money in a freezer would give you the ability to expedite an indictment," says Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University here. "The fact that Jefferson was still unindicted made people wonder whether the other potential offenders were being pursued aggressively."

"The schemes charged are complex, but the essence of this case is simple: Mr. Jefferson corruptly traded on his good office ... to enrich himself and his family through a pervasive pattern of fraud, bribery, and corruption that spanned many years and two continents," said US attorney Chuck Rosenberg on Monday.

Jefferson's lawyer, Robert Trout, says Jefferson is innocent and plans to "fight this indictment and clear his name."

"This case is very complicated and quite strong," says Melanie Sloan of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. He should resign immediately, she says.

Full HTML version of this story which may include photos, graphics, and related links

Niche groups use Web to gain ear of '08 contenders

from the May 29, 2007 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0529/p01s01-uspo.html

How did the Asian Pacific Americans for Progress – no colossus in US politics – land a conference call with the wife of Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards?

By Ariel Sabar Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

TORRANCE, Calif.

With no headquarters, no budget, and members who stay in touch mainly over the Internet, Asian Pacific Americans for Progress is no heavyweight in national politics.

But this month, the group of mostly young, liberal voters scored a conference call with Elizabeth Edwards, the wife of former Sen. John Edwards, a top-tier candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination.

For a half-hour, Mrs. Edwards fielded questions on her husband's views on immigrant visa backlogs, hate-crime laws, and the alleged sexual enslavement of Korean women by the Japanese military during World War II.

"She definitely did some homework," Dennis Arguelles says at a house party in this Los Angeles suburb, where he and five other APAP members listened to her on speaker phone.

The Internet-driven political activism that helped bankroll former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean's insurgent 2004 bid for the Democratic presidential nomination is back, in ways that are starting to transcend fundraising.

Groups of voters tethered by little more than a website are drawing campaigns' attention for their numbers and political savvy, not just their dollars.

"The size of an organization's e-mail list will get more attention now than it would have two or four years ago," says Andrew Rasiej, cofounder of TechPresident.com, a website tracking the intersection of presidential campaigns and the Web.

A seat at a big-ticket fundraiser or the ability to raise large sums of campaign cash is under no threat of extinction as the quickest route to face time with a major presidential candidate. But voters uniting under the banner of a website are getting a level of notice – even if still relatively brief – unseen in earlier election cycles.

In recent weeks, four Democratic hopefuls – Senator Edwards, Rep. Dennis Kucinich, Sen. Barack Obama, and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson – recorded videos detailing their views on the Iraq war for Democracy for America, a largely Web-based umbrella group for some 850 local activist organizations.

Senator Obama taped a nearly six-minute segment reiterating his opposition to the war and praising the group's members. "If all of you are [active and engaged] then I am absolutely confident that over time things will change," he says.

Edwards, in his video, is similarly effusive, calling himself a "huge fan" and thanking members for "extraordinary grass-roots activism and leadership."

A cheap screening

Jim Dean, chairman of Democracy for America and Howard Dean's brother, says the group is not yet making endorsements, just giving members a chance to vet Democratic hopefuls on one of its signature issues.

"The advantage for us is we get smarter about the candidates and … a certain access without having to spend a gazillion dollars," says Mr. Dean. "The advantage for the candidates is, this is a constituency and [potentially] also a great source of help on their campaign."

In the San Francisco Bay Area earlier this year, a social network of 150 undecided Democratic voters loosely organized over the Internet enticed Edwards and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton to salon-style question-and-answer sessions where no money changed hands. Governor Richardson had a video-conference with the group, and Obama granted members free admission to a local fundraiser.

The group, called Win the White House in '08, "is the legal equivalent of a book club," says cofounder Jeff Anderson. "The group doesn't endorse candidates; it doesn't raise money as a group. It's just a network of friends coming together to do what democracy is supposed to be about, which is making an informed decision."

Mr. Rasiej says the outreach reflects a subtle shift away from the traditional model of top-down campaigning towards a newer, Internet-powered model with a bigger role for self-organized groups of voters. "The campaigns that turn themselves inside out and realize the campaigns are being run by the voters and not by them, are in a better position," he says. "The political organization that fails to recognize that dynamic is simply waiting to be included in the section on dinosaurs in Wikipedia."

New tool to find supporter hot spots

Even unorganized voters are finding new online tools for turning candidates' eyes their way.
Pop music fans had long used the website eventful.com to register hopes for a local concert appearance by a favorite artist. Soon, tour promoters were monitoring vote totals to help choose concert locations likely to draw the biggest crowds. This year, the website launched "Eventful Politics," extending the same service to supporters of political candidates.

A spokesman for the San Diego-based company said that the campaigns of Democrats Edwards and Obama and two Republicans – Rep. Ron Paul of Texas and former Virginia governor Jim Gilmore – have already set up accounts, partly to identify supporter hot spots not yet on their radar.

Technology has given ordinary voters real-time access to the campaigns in other ways. In March, people who couldn't attend – or afford – a $1,000-a-head fundraiser for Sen. John McCain in New York City could view a live webcast and pose questions online for $100. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney inaugurated the opening of his Iowa headquarters last month with a "Tele-Town Hall" conference call in which hundreds of voters took part from home.

APAP marvels at its intimate access

Some 65 APAP house parties, many in California, dialed in to the Elizabeth Edwards conference call earlier this month. At the small apartment here, a few guests marveled that a small group in a state unaccustomed to early primary-season attention would get a major candidate's ear. (Edwards himself had planned to do the call, but his wife filled in because of a last-minute scheduling conflict.)

"In California, you don't see candidates," said Eugene Lee, a lawyer with a legal aid group. "We don't even get phone calls. Things like this are not a substitute, but it helps make up for a lack of face-to-face time."

The menu at the house party here was cold cuts, chips, and fruit salad; the dress, T-shirts, khakis, and flip-flops. The guests were not big-money donors, just engaged young voters, many of them with social-service jobs.

APAP, which claims 7,500 members nationwide, was started in 2004 by California supporters of Howard Dean. But Curtis Chin, a founder and board member, still knows most of them only online. "Some people that I'd been working with since the Dean days, I hadn't met until early this year," he says.

In his view, the Internet's capacity to forge nationwide networks of like-minded voters – wealthy or not – is a boon for democracy. "For the longest time it was large donations, large organizations," says Mr. Chin, a screenwriter. "For our group, by pooling all of our small resources together and bringing new people into the process, we actually can have a role in this."
Full HTML version of this story which may include photos, graphics, and related links

FEMA 'more prepared' than before Katrina

from the June 01, 2007 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0601/p02s01-usgn.html

The US disaster response agency won kudos after tornados hit, but '07 hurricane season may prove to be a more rigorous test.

By Zoe Tillman Contributor to The Christian Science Monitor

Washington

Faced with predictions of an "above normal" hurricane season, lawmakers, disaster preparedness experts, and residents in hurricane-prone regions are asking the same question: Is FEMA ready?

There will be no definite answer until the next big hurricane hits a metropolitan area. Still, Federal Emergency Management Agency officials and outside experts alike are touting changes in the agency as proof of its progress since hurricanes Katrina and Rita overwhelmed the Gulf Coast in 2005. Among the improvements they cite:

• FEMA has placed a greater priority on preordering and stockpiling more food, water, and generators in vulnerable areas, as well as on developing detailed plans for distribution and other emergency-response efforts.

• More-experienced administrators, including new FEMA director R. David Paulison, are filling top jobs that were either unoccupied prior to Katrina or filled by officials later accused of being unqualified.

• FEMA is seeking to restore a manageable federal-state-local balance in disaster response. It is urging state and local first-responders to be ready to shoulder much of the relief effort – including executing new evacuation plans for residents unable to get themselves out of harm's way.

"The outlook is good," says Stephen Leatherman, director of the International Hurricane Research Center at Florida International University in Miami. FEMA is "more prepared than [it was] before Katrina, for sure."

Last week, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration forecast that as many as five major hurricanes – Category 3 strength or higher – could hit the Atlantic region (including the Gulf Coast) during the 2007 hurricane season, which runs from June 1 to Nov. 30. Similar predictions for last year failed to materialize because of El Niño and other factors, but there is no guarantee that this hurricane season will be as quiet.

Aware of the intense public scrutiny facing the agency, Mr. Paulison has spent the last month reassuring lawmakers and the public that he oversees a "new FEMA," one that is stronger and more nimble.

Feedback has been mixed. When Paulison testified May 15 before the House Committee on Homeland Security, members praised FEMA for its responses to other natural disasters this year, including the snowstorms that struck the Northeast and the tornados that devastated towns in the Midwest.

National Response Plan is late

But members also questioned why FEMA had yet to finish revising its National Response Plan, which the agency acknowledges will miss its June 1 deadline. The plan, which FEMA says will be released by July 1, lays out guidelines for the responsibilities of all actors involved in disaster response and preparedness. Paulison assured lawmakers that the delay would not affect preparedness.

In his testimony, Paulison said one of the agency's top priorities has been to place more emphasis on developing response plans before disaster strikes, turning hurricane preparedness into a year-round, not seasonal, process.

Prior to Katrina, for example, there were only a "handful" of disaster response plans, which outline the responsibilities of agencies at the local, state, and federal levels in specific areas of disaster response, such as debris clearance and food distribution. Last year there were 40, and today there are 180, Paulison told the House committee.

This is precisely the direction FEMA should be headed, says Andy Garrett, director of preparedness planning and response at the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia University in New York. Preplanning means FEMA's response can be more organized, a necessity during the otherwise chaotic aftermath of a disaster, he says.

FEMA is still far from fixing all the problems exposed by Katrina. Jeff Smith, acting director of the Louisiana homeland security and emergency preparedness office, says FEMA has yet to commit in writing to supply many of the resources – such as food, water, and generators – it provided last year, although he is optimistic that FEMA will follow through on its verbal promises.

Better evacuation planning

FEMA is also placing more pressure on local agencies to prepare evacuation plans, a major weakness exposed by Katrina. In Louisiana's Jefferson Parish and Orleans Parish, which includes New Orleans, there were no evacuation plans for people unable to evacuate themselves, such as the elderly and those without cars, says Jerry Sneed, director of emergency preparedness and homeland security for Orleans Parish.

Mr. Sneed says a new plan is in place, in which city and parish officials will move residents who are unable to evacuate themselves to predetermined locations, from which point FEMA or other federal and state authorities will move them out of danger.

"The federal planning involvement was definitely different last year than in previous years," says David Passey, a spokesman for the FEMA regional office that oversees Louisiana.
In advance of hurricane season, the agency has rushed to fill vacancies in top jobs at more than half of FEMA's 10 regional offices.

Mississippi Emergency Management Agency director Michael Womack warns that new hires can mean less experience at the top. Still, the emphasis on preplanning, he says, has clarified FEMA's role in disaster response, which in turn will make the agency more effective in the future.

"Pre-Katrina, there were a lot of question marks as to what FEMA's role was, and they've tried to fix that.... Overall, I think it's very positive," Mr. Womack says, expressing confidence that his state is ready for the season.

Full HTML version of this story which may include photos, graphics, and related links

Thompson in '08? His entry would shuffle GOP race.

from the June 01, 2007 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0601/p01s03-uspo.html

The Hollywood actor and former US senator already places in the GOP's top tier of candidates, at times breaking into double digits in the polls.

By Linda Feldmann Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

Washington

He has been a lawyer, a US senator, and a TV actor, and now Fred Thompson has made it clear that he's ready to audition for the role of a lifetime, president of the United States.

The 6-foot, 6-inch Tennesseean enters the 2008 race late, but not too late, analysts say, particularly because about half the Republican electorate has indicated to pollsters that the choices so far are less than inspiring. The top tier of GOP candidates all have perceived flaws, and thus Republican activists believe room remains for a straight-ahead fiscal and social conservative who knows how to play to the cameras. The folksy, avuncular manner and Southern twang also don't hurt.

"I think Thompson is going be formidable," says John Geer, a political scientist at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn.

Former Senator Thompson has not yet formally entered the race, but has explored the possibility for months and is now hiring staff. His advisers have told reporters he will formally announce over the Fourth of July holiday in Nashville. Without spending a penny, he already places in the GOP's top tier of candidates, at times breaking into double digits. The question is how much of that early support is really a vote for "none of the above," rather than an affirmative choice by Republican primary voters.

And, as Gen. Wesley Clark learned four years ago in the race for the Democratic nomination, it's one thing to be wooed by supporters with a draft campaign, but another thing entirely to actually run and open yourself up to the scrutiny and criticism of the news media and opponents. The difference, with Thompson, is that he has political experience and a bit of a shtick, which General Clark did not. Observers expect Thompson to dust off the red pickup truck that made regular appearances during his first Senate race.

Still, he has his work cut out as he seeks to introduce himself to Americans. Even if he's a familiar face to fans of NBC's "Law and Order" as District Attorney Arthur Branch, few voters could get beyond square one on Thompson's issue positions.

"Most people don't know much about Fred Thompson," says Stuart Rothenberg, editor of a nonpartisan political report. "Some know he's an actor, some know he's a senator, [but] I don't think anybody has gone through his political record with a fine-tooth comb. He's hardly an ideologue."

In easy comparisons with the nation's last (and only) actor-president, Ronald Reagan, Thompson probably does not stack up at this stage in that he lacks the defined ideology that turned Reagan the man into Reagan the movement. Thompson, in contrast, garners attention from the figure he cuts, and less from anything he did as a senator. In his eight years in Congress, he was not known as a leader on any particular issues.

"There are plenty of people who find him intriguing or appealing, because they see in him whatever they want to see in him," says Mr. Rothenberg.

Thompson's late entry into the race also raises questions about how much he really wants to be president – and whether he has the fire in the belly to embark on such a grueling race. But, some analysts say, the fact that Thompson was not born wanting to be president, in the manner of a Bill Clinton, does not necessarily hurt him. In Thompson's case, the fact that he has spent much time considering the possibility, being thorough and cautious, could help him.

"Ronald Reagan didn't have the burning desire to be president either," says Mr. Geer. "The American public could find that potentially attractive about Thompson."

Still, Thompson will face a steep task in fundraising, as the top tier of candidates have already raised at least $10 million each. Some analysts note that the Republican field's lower fundraising totals for the first quarter of 2007, in comparison with the Democratic field's take, show that there is a great reserve of untapped GOP money out there for Thompson.

Of the top candidates in the race, former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani enjoys wide name recognition but holds liberal views on social issues, which could kill his chances when voters start tuning in – especially religious conservatives. Sen. John McCain of Arizona, though a conservative on most issues, is also seen as unreliable by the Christian right. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney wins points for his executive experience, but his recent shift to the right also leaves some conservatives cold.

Thompson is expected to gain in the polls when (and if) he does formally join the race. And if Thompson remains competitive, showing poll numbers in the top tier, that could deter another lurking Republican, former House speaker Newt Gingrich, from entering the race. Mr. Gingrich has long hinted at launching his candidacy in September, but if Thompson catches on, Gingrich may be frozen out.

"Where is Gingrich going to go?" says Tony Fabrizio, a GOP pollster unaffiliated with any '08 candidate. "He's already 100 percent known by [the party]. It will be tough for him to gain support until other people drop out."

Who Thompson hurts in the existing field and who he helps is open to speculation. Some analysts suggest that Mr. Giuliani gains, because Thompson's entry dilutes the conservative field. But it may be that Thompson takes away from all the front-runners.

Another unknown is how effectively Thompson will use all the modern tools of communication, particularly those that involve cameras. But given his long experience in television and film, Thompson could have a leg up over the other candidates. And for a taste of the Thompson style, the video of the former senator responding to liberal filmmaker Michael Moore about healthcare in Cuba, posted on Youtube.com, is one place to start.

• Zoe Tillman in Washington contributed to this report.

Full HTML version of this story which may include photos, graphics, and related links

New Jersey kids help save endangered turtles

from the May 29, 2007 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0529/p18s02-hfks.html

Who says schoolchildren can't make a difference? Here's a group that is!

By Wynne Crombie

The 5-year-olds proudly wore T-shirts that read "SLOW ... Turtle Crossing" across the front. The class from the Avalon/Stone Harbor combined kindergarten near Stone Harbor, N.J., had made and sold turtle-shaped cookies at their school to do their part to help save the terrapins, endangered reptiles that live in the nearby salt marshes. (A terrapin is a type of turtle.)

They and many other area schoolchildren have become involved in a hands-on terrapin research and conservation program at the Wetlands Institute in Stone Harbor.

I met the terrapin-loving students when I visited the Wetlands Institute to find out about the work being done there.

"Watch out for those jaws!" Roger Wood, director of the institute's Terrapin Conservation Project, warned me as a baby terrapin squirmed in my hand.

At home in salt marshes

I had just picked up the small turtle. Its head and hind webbed feet were making constant thumping motions against my fingers.

Terrapins are the only reptiles of the salt marsh, an area where saltwater from an ocean, bay, or gulf meets freshwater from a river. They are found in temperate and subtropical areas such as the East and Gulf coasts of the United States.

Terrapins also live in western India and southern Asia. They do not naturally occur in fresh water. This is one of the reasons they do not make good pets.

While most people like terrapins, the tiny turtles have had great trouble with humans. A hundred years ago, they were eaten as a delicacy.

Nowadays, many of them die trying to escape from commercial crab traps. They find their way into the traps, but are unable to get out, and so may drown.

There's good news from scientists at the institute about this, though: They have developed a wire excluder device to fit into the crab traps. This keeps terrapins out, but allows crabs to enter.

Terrapins face dangers from other animals, too. Crows and raccoons attack them. Skunks like to dig into their nests and eat the eggs.

If all that weren't enough, the building of seaside vacation homes and resorts has resulted in the loss of beaches and marsh grasses, where terrapin nesting typically takes place.

However, it's the female terrapin that is in the greatest danger. During June and July, she plods along the New Jersey shore seeking out higher ground on which to lay her eggs (typically eight to 10 per nest). Female terrapins like to build their nests on sand dunes or narrow reaches above the high tide line.

"Unfortunately," Dr. Wood says, "cars kill as many as 40 terrapins a day before they can reach the nesting areas."

That can mean the daily loss of 300 to 400 eggs that will never become terrapins. So every 24 hours, a patrol car from the Wetlands Institute searches the highway for terrapins that have been run over.

From rescue to hatching

In addition to rehabilitating injured adult terrapins, scientists rescue the eggs from killed females and take them back to the institute, where they are incubated. That means placing them in a warm spot that imitates the mother's warmth.

The future terrapin's sex is determined by the temperature during incubation. If the temperature is kept at 86 degrees F., females will be produced in six to eight weeks. Males are produced in two to four weeks at a cooler 78 degrees F.

Dr. Wood showed me a large plastic box with a fitted lid that looked much like Tupperware.
"This," he said with a grin, "is our high-tech incubation system,"

Inside, the eggs, about 1-1/2 inches long and placed three inches apart, rested upon four inches of vermiculite, a soft mineral used for insulation and in gardening, During the incubation process, it's kept moist at all times.

After hatching, the young turtles don't eat for several weeks due to a built-in food supply from their mothers.

When the time comes to give them food, the babies are fed a combination of chopped- up minnows, mealworms, and Purina trout chow. (It may sound awful to kids, but to turtles, it's delicious!)

Later the turtles are deliberately kept from hibernation. This makes them hungry and speeds up the growing process.

The hatchlings stay at the institute for nearly a year. This is called headstarting. During this time, their shells grow to about two to three inches long.

Back home they go

When the terrapins are that size when released, they are better able to deal with enemies than they would be if they were released as soon as they have hatched.

Each year, some of the eggs are taken to local elementary schools, where students in upper grades construct incubators for them. The children grow attached to the terrapins that hatch from the eggs and even give them names.

About 80 percent of these hatchlings survive the headstarting process to be released back into the salt marshes by the children.

Before being released, the small terrapins are weighed, measured, and marked with a microchip tag. The tag enables scientists to track the terrapins' movements and their nesting sites. Most nest very close to where their mothers nested.

After a brief introduction by Dr. Wood, the kindergartners marched to the dock. Adults showed them how to carefully release the turtles. There were many "oohs" and "aahs" as the little turtles disappeared into the wetlands.

After seventh-graders from the Jordan Road Elementary School in Somers Point, N.J., released a dozen terrapins, they gave the institute a check for $100. This was money they had raised through the sale of homemade "turtle" candy.

A group of Quinton Elementary School fourth-graders has also become involved in the project, raising 10 hatchlings for release back into the salt marsh.

For these children, it was a muddy march at low tide to the Wetlands Institute dock. There, amid cheers, the children released the headstarters.

Every year approximately 250 headstarters are released in the vicinity of the institute.

What other kids can do

Local children have become quite savvy about the care of terrapins. They are quick to point out that you do not disturb terrapins in any way while they are nesting.

If you should find a terrapin on the road, the best thing to do is pick it up gently and carry it across the road in the direction that it's already headed.

It is especially important not to attempt to take an adult or hatchling terrapin home for a pet, because they survive only in salt marshes. Also, residents of New Jersey who do so would be breaking the law.

The children of Stone Harbor are proud of the work they do in helping the terrapins to live. And, as another summer season approaches, the cycle begins anew.

[Editor's note: The original version included an incorrect photo.]

Full HTML version of this story which may include photos, graphics, and related links