On Monday, the day Vice-President Joe Biden was to arrive in Israel, the Israeli government announced approval for 112 new homes in Beitar Illit, an ultra-Orthodox settlement near Bethlehem in the occupied West Bank, despite having agreed in November to curb settlement growth in partial fulfillment of Israel’s obligations under the Bush administration road map.

On Tuesday, Israel’s Interior Ministry announced plans “to build 1,600 new housing units for Jews” in Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem. Biden released this statement in response:

I condemn the decision by the government of Israel to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem. The substance and timing of the announcement, particularly with the launching of proximity talks, is precisely the kind of step that undermines the trust we need right now and runs counter to the constructive discussions that I’ve had here in Israel. We must build an atmosphere to support negotiations, not complicate them.

Interior Minister Eli Yishai apologized on Wednesday “for causing domestic and international distress” with the timing of the announcement, and Prime Minister Netanyahu reportedly told Biden, “No one was seeking to embarrass you or undermine your visit — on the contrary, you are a true friend to Israel.” But Meir Margalit, a member of Jerusalem’s City Council told Israel’s Ynet News that the ministry “meant to sabotage the announcement that Netanyahu issued today regarding the renewal of indirect negotiations with the Palestinians. It is also a kind of slap in the face of the American administration.”

Despite Netanyahu’s apology, his position in favor of settlement expansion is clear. As Max Blumenthal reports, “a day before Biden’s arrival, Netanyahu appeared onstage with Pastor John Hagee in Jerusalem.” Hagee is a radical American cleric who opposes the two-state solution and supports unlimited Israeli settlement expansion with millions of American dollars. “If America puts pressure on Israel to divide Jerusalem we are following the blueprint of the Prince of Darkness,” Hagee has said. “Amos 3:2 states that any nation that divides the Land of Israel will come under the severe judgment of God.”

Hagee’s views are 180 degrees opposite of the goals of the United States and the international community to establish a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza. Netanyahu’s appearing onstage with Hagee is a strong indication that his stated support for the creation of a Palestinian state is less than genuine.

Yesterday, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) joined a growing chorus of conservatives condemning the McCarthy-like tactics of Keep America Safe, the new group led by Bill Kristol and Liz Cheney, which recently released an ad questioning the loyalties of Justice Department lawyers who were once involved in representing al-Qaeda terror suspects. Today in the Wall Street Journal — without mentioning Cheney, Kristol, their group, or the ad — former Bush Attorney General Michael Mukasey denounced their campaign:

Most recently, lawyers now employed at the Justice Department who, while in private practice, volunteered to represent suspected terrorist detainees, or argued legal positions supporting various rights of such detainees, have been portrayed as in-house counsel to al Qaeda.

This is all of a piece, and what it is a piece of is something both shoddy and dangerous. A lawyer who represents a party in a contested matter has an ethical obligation to make any and all tenable legal arguments that will help that party.

Mukasey added that while it’s “prudent for us to assure that no government lawyers are bringing to their public jobs any agenda, … that prudence is not properly exercised by arguing that lawyers…are automatically to be identified with their former clients and regarded as a fifth column within the Justice Department.” “Liz Cheney is a former student of mine — I don’t know what moves her on this thing,” said University of Chicago law professor Richard Epstein, who called the Keep America Safe ad “appalling.”

Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN), who is a playing “a crucial role in bipartisan negotiations over financial regulation,” pushed to “remove a provision from draft legislation that would have empowered federal authorities to crack down on payday lenders. … The industry is politically influential in his home state and a significant contributor to his campaigns, records show.”

The Census Bureau will hire up to 750,000 workers in May, “a hiring binge that could knock the unemployment rate down by as much as a half-point.” The Census hiring comes “at the best possible time” for President Obama, and could lead to positive monthly job growth figures for only the second time in the past year.

Rules and Administration Committee Chairman Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) will hold a series of hearings on reforming the filibuster. The first hearing, scheduled for March 24, will “examine the history of the filibuster” and the following two will “likely focus on specific filibuster reform proposals.”

U.S. officials fear that the controversy over disqualified candidates in Iraq’s national election could undermine its legitimacy and inflame opponents of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. The election commission — run by Ahmed Chalabi — barred many candidates that belong to former prime minister Ayad Allawi’s coalition, “which appears to have done well in secular and Sunni communities.”

Chief Justice John Roberts said yesterday that President Obama’s criticism of the Supreme Court during his State of the Union address was “very troubling.” Speaking to University of Alabama law students, Roberts said the the annual speech has “degenerated to a political pep rally.”

Local officials in Washington D.C. say legalizing gay marriage in the District will bring the city much needed jobs. A study by the nonprofit Williams Institute predicted it will “create 700 jobs and contribute $52.2 million over three years.” “We think it’s a great opportunity to capitalize on groups that will be coming to Washington,” said District tourism official Elliott Ferguson.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said yesterday that the pilot who crashed his plane into an IRS building last month was not a case of domestic terrorism. The pilot, A. Joseph Stack “had his own personal issues and personal motives,” Napolitano said.

The Washington Post reports that shortly after Eric Massa (D-NY) joined Congress last year, “several male staff members began to feel uncomfortable with the sexually loaded language their boss routinely used.” Rumors began circulating that he had “sexually propositioned young male staffers and interns,” possibly even “groping at least two aides.”

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) announced yesterday that nine additional senators had joined him to co-sponsor legislation repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell: John Kerry (D-MA), Richard Durbin (D-IL), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), Sherrod Brown (OH), Tom Udall (NM), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Bob Casey (D-PA), and Russ Feingold (D-WI). There are now 23 total co-sponsors to the Military Readiness Enhancement Act of 2010.

And finally: Don’t confuse Britain’s Conservative Party with America’s conservative movement. In a new interview with Vanity Fair, UK Conservative Party leader David Cameron said of the Sarah Palin phenomenon: “It’s hard for us to understand, if I can put it that way.”

Follow ThinkProgress on Twitter.

The Census is a popular topic of right-wing conspiracy theories and Fox News host Glenn Beck spent a good portion of his radio show today fear-mongering about it. Going through the form, he determined that the government doesn’t have the right to ask any of the questions — except for the first one inquiring about many people live in your home.

He took particular issue with a question asking for the respondent’s race. But after Beck’s co-host pointed out that the question has been part of the Census since the Founding Fathers’ time, Beck twisted the three-fifths law to claim that the Census is now breeding slavery:

BECK: Why were they asking the race question, you said when, in 1790? … Right, they want to know, do you count as three-fifths? Do you count at all? So, you have to know how many slaves did you have? People find that offensive today because the idea was, if we’re going to count, we want to know how many are here for services etc. etc. and slaves would get less. Well that’s not right. One. One. ‘I’m not three-fifths, I’m one. Whites are not worth than me.’ Now reverse it, why are they asking this question today?

CO-HOST: Because minorities are worth more than whites.

BECK: Exactly right. So you will get more dollars if you are a minority. So you are worth more as a monitory. Well there is no difference. The reason you don’t answer the race question is because one, everyone counts as one. All men are created equal. If you were offended back in 1790 about slavery and that everyone should count the same, do not answer the race question. How dare you. How dare you. At least in 1790, they were doing it to slow the South down on slavery. To try to stop it as much as they can. Today they are asking the race question to try to increase slavery. Your dependence on the master in Washington. No way, don’t answer that question.

Listen here:

Beck seems to be arguing that because a handful of federal programs provide funding to help minority communities, minorities are “worth more” than white people. Of course, the Census actually counts everyone equally, as the Constitution requires, so Beck’s complaints seem aimed more at civil rights programs than at the Census.

Moreover, there is a big “difference” between a law that counted people as less than human and a question that helps minority communities get needed aid. The Census’ race question is “critical” to enforcing civil rights policies and is used to “promote equal employment opportunities and to assess racial disparities in health and environmental risks.” So by urging his listeners to not complete this question, he’s potentially damaging these important efforts.

As ThinkProgress has previously noted, the three-fifths law was not an abolitionist provision designed to “slow the South down on slavery,” as Beck claims. Many of the Founders were from the South and owned slaves, and there were other pro-slavery clasuses in the Constitution that Beck’s revisionist history can’t explain.

So does Beck think the Census has a “deep seated hatred of white people or white culture”?

Erin Rosa of Campus Progress reports that NumbersUSA, a “mainstream” immigration restrictionist group with troublesome ties to hate groups, hosted a public conference call last night to discuss “a variety of tactics to thwart an upcoming march on Washington DC by immigrant rights supporters.” One tactic proposed on the call involves portraying women from Mexico as the “new welfare queens”:

CALLER 1: I would like to speak out on something. I feel the new welfare queen in America today is women coming from Mexico with a bunch of babies. So I feel they’re all coming over here and having all these babies, they are the new welfare queen in America…

New people in America today with a lot of babies, ’cause they coming from Mexico having a bunch of babies. And our tax dollars is taking care of them babies, ’cause the mothers are illegal. So to me, we need to speak out about letting them know they’re the new welfare queens in America.

CALLER 2: That was well said brother!

MACDONALD: We will make a note of that. Thank you very much. I appreciate that.

CALLER 3: One piece of information would be, they aren’t babies, they’re dependents. Don’t use babies. It’s emotional to them. They have dependents. We have babies.

Callers also complained that tea party organizers are “for the illegals.” Despite acknowledging that FreedomWorks chairman Dick Armey funds and inspired the movement itself, Armey was dismissed as not being a “true Tea Party patriot” due to his pro-immigration views. Another caller indicated that tea party organizers specifically asked her to put immigration within the movement’s focus — limited taxation — and asked for more advice on “putting it in their terms.” Roy Beck, Executive Director, responded that “we’ll be a whole lot better off if when [sic] we talk about illegal immigrants we leave off the Hispanic-Latino stuff” and agreed that the tea party’s narrative was the “best way to talk about this.”

However, as long Beck counts on the support of activists who want to equate Mexican mothers with welfare queens, he may have a hard time disassociating his movement from the “Hispanic-Latino stuff.” It says a lot when even Armey perceives anti-immigrant groups as toxic. With his eye quietly on the growing Latino electorate, Armey has explicitly stated that he’s not interested in associating with folks like former Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO), citing his “harsh and uncharitable and mean-spirited” immigration positions as his number one reason.

Armey isn’t alone. Former Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) and Fox News host Glenn Beck are two tea party darlings who have also expressed a need for a more humane immigration policy. Nonetheless, anti-immigrant nativists have done their best to exploit the tea bagger rage that folks like Armey, Palin, and Beck have nurtured. As a result, groups like NumbersUSA have achieved at least some success in recruiting a number of vocal supporters who seek to define both immigrants and “tea party patriots” on their own terms.

Cross-posted on the Wonk Room.

In recent days, prominent conservatives have denounced a McCarthyite ad questioning the loyalties of Justice Department lawyers who have represented Guantanamo detainees in the past. The ad was produced by Keep America Safe, the new group led by Bill Kristol and Liz Cheney. Today, Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC) added his name to the opposition:

“I’ve been a military lawyer for almost 30 years, I represented people as a defense attorney in the military that were charged with some pretty horrific acts, and I gave them my all,” said Graham. “This system of justice that we’re so proud of in America requires the unpopular to have an advocate and every time a defense lawyer fights to make the government do their job, that defense lawyer has made us all safer.”

– DJ Carella

As the outlook on passage of health reform improves, Republicans have shifted to a new obstructionist strategy: attacking the process of reconciliation. Republicans claim that reconciliation was only intended to be used for bills dealing closely with the budget. In fact, when Republicans were in power, GOP lawmakers used reconciliation numerous times to pass major domestic policy legislation, including the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 and important changes to health care policy. In fact, 34 of the 41 Senate Republicans have used reconciliation in the past to pass major pieces of domestic policy.

In 2005, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) famously defended reconciliation as “majority rules.” Think Progress has compiled a video of some of these 34 senators who have, in the past, defended reconciliation and railed against the filibuster. Some highlights:

– “If you’ve got 51 votes for your position, you win.” — Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH), 3/15/05

– “For some time, I hoped that my colleagues who oppose reform would allow a majority in both bodies to prevail and do what the vast majority of the American public desires.” — Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), 10/15/99

– “It [the filibuster] is the product of a rule of the Senate passed many years after the ratification of the Constitution. This rule does not derive from the authority of the Constitution.” — Sen. Kit Bond (R-MO), 5/19/05

– “Filibusters are neither an idea of the founding fathers nor a historical tradition of the Senate.” — Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), 4/27/05

Watch it:

The full list of Senate Republicans who have used reconciliation to pass major domestic policy, as well as a list of those pieces of legislation can be found after the jump:

Major domestic policy legislation that these 34 Senators have voted for through reconciliation in the past 20 years: Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989, Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, Balanced Budget Act of 1995, Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, Balanced Budget Act of 1997, Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, Taxpayer Refund and Relief Act of 1999, Marriage Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2000, Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003, Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005, College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007

Senator State Senator State Lamar Alexander Tennessee Judd Gregg New Hampshire John Barrasso Wyoming Orrin Hatch Utah Robert Bennett Utah Kay Bailey Hutchison Texas Christopher Bond Montana James Inhofe Oklahoma Sam Brownback Kansas Johnny Isakson Georgia Jim Bunning Kentucky Jon Kyl Arizona Richard Burr North Carolina Richard Lugar Indiana Tom Coburn Oklahoma John McCain Arizona Susan Collins Maine Mitch McConnell Kentucky Bob Corker Tennessee Lisa Murkowski Alaska John Cornyn Texas Pat Roberts Kansas Mike Crapo Idaho Jeff Sessions Alabama James DeMint Sourth Carolina Richard Shelby Alabama John Ensign Nevada Olympia Snowe Maine Mike Enzi Wyoming John Thune South Dakota Lindsey Graham South Carolina David Vitter Louisiana Chuck Grassley Iowa George Voinovich Ohio

A new study released by the research and consulting firm Spectrem Group finds that the number of millionaires in the United States increased by double digits the last year. According to Spectrem Group’s data, “families with a net worth of at least $1 million, excluding primary residences, rose to 7.8 million in 2009,” an increase of 16 percent:

The millionaires’ club in the U.S. grew by 16 percent in 2009, following a 27 percent decline in 2008.

Families with a net worth of at least $1 million, excluding primary residences, rose to 7.8 million in 2009, an increase from 6.7 million a year earlier, according to a survey of high- net-worth U.S. households conducted by Spectrem Group.

“With the markets trending upwards, we expected an increase,” George H. Walper Jr., president of Spectrem Group, said in a telephone interview. The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index increased 24 percent in 2009 and has risen 68 percent over the past 12 months

While the number of American multimillionaires rose last year, Americans continued to suffer from the Great Recession. The unemployment rate reached double digits, millions of Americans lost their homes, and wages for most workers stagnated. The United States is unique among industrialized countries in its enormous income inequality. Data from the U.S. Department of Labor shows that if income inequality continues to rise at the current rate, the income gap in the United States “will resemble that of Mexico by year 2043.”

Insurers have responded to the administration’s campaign against recent rate hikes by blaming increasing health care costs, provider cost increases and adverse selection (healthier Americans are dropping coverage) for their premium increases. To hear them tell it, the insurance industry is a low-profit industry that spends just one cent of every premium dollar on administration and strives to reduce costs by encouraging efficiencies. Insurers “do not deserve to be vilified for political purposes,” Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP) told the AP:

For every dollar spent on health care in America, less than one penny goes toward health plan profits. The focus needs to be on the other 99 cents.

But the argument that insurers run a tight ship is misleading, on several counts, not least of which is the fact that insurers are planning to spend “more than $1 million” not on health care claims — as their justification for the premium hikes would suggest — but “to run television ads on cable stations nationwide beginning in the next few days to push back on the attacks on insurers.”

That $1 million ad fund will presumably come from the one penny that goes towards health care profits. But this too is misleading. Zirkelbach is clever enough to compare the private insurance industry’s administrative spending to national health care expenditures — 45 percent of which includes spending in Medicare, Medicaid and other public programs. In the context of total spending, insurers administrative costs may look small, but compared to the revenues of private insurers, administrative spending is seen as far more substantial. Insurers skim off 15-20 percent of premium dollars for administrative costs and profits which fund TV ad campaigns, Washington lobbyists, lavish company retreats and outlandish CEO salaries.

The top five earning insurance companies averaged profits of $12.2 billion, an increase of $4.4 billion, or 56 percent, from 2008. And in 2008 (the last year for which data was available), CEO compensation for these companies ranged from $3 million to $24 million.” Below is a partial list of insurer/CEO profits:

Insurer: Company Profits 2009: CEO Total Compensation 2008 Or Earlier: CEO 5 Year Compensation: UnitedHealth Group $3.8 billion $5 million – WellPoint $4.75 billion $4 million – Atena $1.28 billion $38 million $77 million Humana $1 billion $2 million $56 million Cigna $1.3 billion $10 million $121 million

Insurer profits increased even in the midst of the current recession. Last week, during a hearing before the House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee, WellPoint admitted that it increased premiums to keep up with medical costs and maintain a 2% profit. The company’s 2009 fourth quarter net income “was more than $2.7 billion, a 727 percent increase from the fourth quarter of last year” — even as membership declined by some 4 percent.

Insurer profits are of course just one culprit for increasing premiums, but considering that insurers have been able to increase their returns by purging sicker Americans from the rolls and pulling out of competitive markets, the President’s strong rhetoric is more than justified. The Senate bill will start forcing insurers to earn profit by figuring out ways to deliver quality care more efficiently and they’re not very interested in accepting these changes.

Last month, Rush Limbaugh criticized Mitt Romney for endorsing Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) in his campaign against J.D. Hayworth in Arizona’s GOP Senate primary. “I think he’s risking his career over a guy, endorsing McCain, who is so out of step with what’s going on right now,” Limbaugh complained. Newsmax asked Romney about Limbaugh’s criticism in a new interview. But while Romney (surprisingly) stuck to his position, he couldn’t help but seize the moment to pander to the Limbaugh crowd:

ROMNEY: Well, you know, I find it hard to disagree with Rush Limbaugh on topics but on this one I do. I know Senator McCain. [...] It may not be right for me politically but frankly, the country’s in a posture right now. We face such challenges right now. It’s time for people to do what they think is right for the country and to spend less time about what may or may not be good for them politically.

Watch it:

It’s remarkable that Romney would criticize someone for taking a political stand, considering he has distinguished himself as one who regularly changes his positions for political gain.

The LA Times reports today on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s growing “large-scale grass-roots political operation” that is being “funded by record-setting amounts of money raised from corporations and wealthy individuals.” In 2009, the Chamber spent $144 million on lobbying and grassroots organizing, “well beyond the spending of individual labor unions or the Democratic or Republican national committees.” Some more details on its new initiative:

The chamber has signed up some 6 million individuals who are not chamber members and has begun asking them to help with lobbying and, soon, with get-out-the-vote efforts in upcoming congressional campaigns. [...]

The new grass-roots program, the brainchild of chamber political director Bill Miller, is concentrating on 22 states. Among them are Colorado, where incumbent Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet is vulnerable; Arkansas, where Democratic Sen. Blanche Lincoln faces an uphill reelection battle; and Ohio, where the chamber sees opportunities in numerous House races and an open Senate seat.

The network, called Friends of the U.S. Chamber, has been used to generate more than a million letters and e-mails to members of Congress, 700,000 of them in opposition to the Democratic healthcare plan. That is an increase from 40,000 congressional contacts generated in 2008.

According to the LA Times, the Chamber’s “expanding influence” is “worrisome” to top White House officials, including Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and Senior Adviser Valerie Jarrett. This frustration was echoed yesterday in a meeting with top Treasury Department officials, including Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, that ThinkProgress attended.

When asked by ThinkProgress what they think of the Chamber, officials agreed that the association — along with some other groups in the business community — are deliberately distorting the administration’s positions to the American public. They expressed particular dissatisfaction with the the Chamber’s ad campaign fear-mongering against the administration’s push for a strong Consumer Financial Protection Agency. In January, the Chamber arranged to “fly-in” some representatives from small businesses to Capitol Hill and “lead” them to a pre-arranged series of anti-CFPA meetings. The association’s ad campaign contains the ludicrous claims that the CFPA would regulate bakeries and grocery stores.

As many federal lawmakers and the Obama administration push for cap-and-trade legislation, health care reform, regulatory reform, and corporate tax reform, the U.S. Chamber stands as the most well-funded opposition to progressive change. The group spent $10-$20 million of insurance-industry-provided cash on fighting reform. After Scott Brown’s victory in Massachusetts, the Chamber was quick to congratulate itself for running television ads in support of the candidate.

Same-sex couples began marrying in the nation’s capital today, with some lining up as early as 3:30 a.m. to pick up their licenses from D.C. Superior Court. The first couple to officially tie the knot was Angelisa Young and Sinjoyla Townsend, who met in a constitutional law class at the University of the District of Columbia. They wed at the office of the Human Rights Campaign, along with two other couples. Watch part of Young and Townsend’s ceremony here:

D.C. is now the sixth place in the country where marriage equality is legal, following Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont. Watch more coverage of today’s celebrations.

Hate radio host Rush Limbaugh has been one of health care reform’s most vociferous opponents, warning that “[h]uman beings will die earlier than normal” under the “freedom killing” and “life threatening” plan, and calling for it to be “aborted.” Yesterday, Limbaugh put his money where his mouth is, saying that if health care passes and all his fears are realized, he’ll leave the country:

CALLER: If the health care bill passes, where would you go for health care yourself? And the second part of that is, what would happen to the doctors, do they have to participate in the federal program, or could they opt out of it? [...]

LIMBAUGH: My guess in even in Canada and even in the UK, doctors have opted out. And once they’ve opted, they can’t see anybody Medicare, Medicaid, or what will become the exchanges. They have to have a clientele of private patients that will pay them a retainer and it’ll be a very small practice. I don’t know if that’s been outlawed in the Senate bill. I don’t know. I’ll just tell you this, if this passes and it’s five years from now and all that stuff gets implemented — I am leaving the country. I’ll go to Costa Rica.

Listen here:

Limbaugh’s self-imposed exile should be all the incentive needed to pass health care reform.

Former president George W. Bush, “in his most active intervention since leaving the White House,” called the UK’s Conservative Party leader David Cameron to ask him to support the Northern Ireland peace process. Members of Congress wrote to Cameron last month to tell him that insurgents would be “emboldened” if the peace process is slowed down.

The International Brotherhood of Electric Workers has filed a lawsuit against the mega investment bank Goldman Sachs for overpaying its top executives. The lawsuit “seeks to stop Goldman from allocating roughly 47 percent of 2009 net revenue as compensation, saying such allocations ‘vastly overcompensate management and constitute corporate waste.’”

62 percent: Turnout in Iraq’s parliamentary elections on Sunday, “higher than in last year’s provincial ballot, despite attempts by Sunni Islamist insurgents to disrupt the vote with attacks that killed 39.”

“Leaders of nearly a dozen grass-roots immigrant rights groups excoriated President Obama and congressional Democrats on Monday, accusing them of moving too slowly to legalize the status of undocumented immigrants.” The White House said that President Obama will soon be meeting with Sens. Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) to “discuss the bipartisan immigration bill.”

In Israel, Vice President Biden assured Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu today that Israel has Washington’s “unstinting support,” and said the U.S. intends to curb Iran’s nuclear program. “There is no space between the United States and Israel when it comes to Israel’s security,” Biden said.

“Mideast rivals Israel and Syria” each announced ambitions to develop nuclear energy, today. Laying out their hopes “at an international conference in Paris on civilian nuclear energy,” the countries “could come under the microscope of international inspectors” to ensure they don’t use the programs to make weapons.

A bipartisan group of representatives in the House plans to force a vote Wednesday on withdrawing from Afghanistan. “We haven’t had a real debate,” said Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH). “We want to light the fire of the American peace movement.” House leaders plan to allow “three hours of formal debate” on Kucinich’s measure.

Nearly “200 women who served as military pilots during World War II as part of the Women Airforce Service Pilots (WASP) program” will finally be recognized in a ceremony at the Capitol tomorrow, where they will be awarded the Congressional Gold Medal. The women “did everything the men did except participate in combat.”

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed yesterday to hear a case dealing with the free speech rights of Fred Phelps’ Westboro Baptist Church, an anti-gay hate group. The court will “consider an appeal from the father of a slain Marine” whose $5 million verdict against the church was overturned by an appeals court.

And finally: Disgraced former congressman Mark Foley returned to the public eye yesterday when he went to a speech by former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney at the Forum Club in Florida. “People have been begging me to come back to the Forum Club,” said Foley, who was a regular before his 2006 scandal.

Follow ThinkProgress on Twitter.

The Oklahoma legislature is currently locked in a dispute over whether to tackle the state’s divorce rate, the third-highest in the nation. Although some Republicans are pushing the legislation, other conservatives are outraged at the “government intrusion” into their private lives:

Republican members proposed three pieces of legislation imposing new regulations on marriage and divorce in Oklahoma. Two of the measures were defeated, but another — requiring counseling for those planning to wed, and therapy sessions for couples considering divorce — is awaiting action.

The issue has produced sharp clashes among conservative colleagues who normally find themselves in agreement. The debates have featured charges of hypocrisy and of betraying Republican principles against government intrusion into private lives. [...]

“How far do I want government to come into my home and your home about private personal matters?” asked Rep. Leslie Osborn, a Republican from Tuttle, in a debate. She referred to state government as a “huge monster.”

ThinkProgress spoke with state Rep. Jeannie McDaniel (D), who opposes the divorce bills because one hour of counseling — as proposed by one of the measures — won’t make a major difference in people’s marriages:

We know that one hour of counseling doesn’t do anything. We have counseling programs, especially in Family and Children Services…for families that are going through divorce who have children…and those have proven to be very effective. And they’re paid for by our Department of Human Services; they have grants available. They’ve been in place for over 14 years. They have a very high success rate of good outcomes. … They [participants in the programs] sort of laughed at this and said, “One hour, you’ve got to be kidding?” And it can be by anybody — it can be by your priest, it can be by a faith-based counselor.

McDaniel noted that some of the strongest debates on the divorce measures are coming from within the Republican Party, many of whom are against the government intervention. However, some of their concern rings a bit hollow; some of these same lawmakers — including Osborn — have had no problem imposing “government intrusion” into women’s “private lives.” Last fall, the Oklahoma passed a law that would have collected personal details about every single abortion performed in the state and posted them on a public website. (The Oklahoma County District Court struck down the law last month because it covered too many topics for one piece of legislation.)

McDaniel noted that Republican lawmakers are now putting forth several anti-choice measures once again, as single bills. Just last week, for example, the state House passed a measure “that would require a woman be given a description of ultrasound images of her unborn child and be offered those images before getting an abortion.” Rep. Dan Sullivan (R), the sponsor of the abortion website legislation, opposed the divorce counseling bill in a Feb. 22 vote.

Oklahoma also bans same-sex couples from marrying — a clear “government intrusion” into private life that many Republican lawmakers seem to find perfectly acceptable.

Tony Perkins, president of the far-right Family Research Council, said that he endorses efforts to lower the divorce rate, as long as the government does not “mandate” them. “I prefer the carrot versus the stick,” said Perkins, who opposes marriage equality.

Bob Jones University

According to the Associated Press, home-schooling parents seeking textbooks that include evolution are finding the dominance of Christian-based materials to be isolating and frustrating. The publishers that largely control the home-school textbook market, which include Bob Jones University Press and Apologia Educational Ministries Inc., often include overt affirmations of Christianity and “stack the deck against evolution“:

“Those who do not believe that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant Word of God will find many points in this book puzzling,” says the introduction to “Biology: Third Edition” from Bob Jones University Press. “This book was not written for them.” The textbook delivers a religious ultimatum to young readers and parents, warning in its “History of Life” chapter that a “Christian worldview … is the only correct view of reality; anyone who rejects it will not only fail to reach heaven but also fail to see the world as it truly is.”

In 2007, 83 percent of home-schooling parents said they preferred to give their children “religious and moral instruction.” But science educators who have reviewed sections from some of the popular home-school books say the texts could “steer students away from careers in biology or the study of the history of the earth.” According to Jerry Coyne, an ecology and evolution professor at the University of Chicago, “These books are promulgating lies to kids.” When the AP asked for comment from Bob Jones University on the “History of Life” chapter criticized widely by scientists, a spokesman said the “ultimatum” inclusion was “an editing error” and would be excluded from future editions.

– Nick McClellan

During his reign as Senate Minority Leader, Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has led his party to engage in an unprecedented level of obstruction — wielding the filibuster to block even routine bills and nominations while simultaneously lying about his own previous support of majority rule in the Senate.  No one has fared worse under McConnell’s blanket obstructionism than President Obama’s nominees to key government positions, ambassadorships and judgeships.  A massive 237 Obama nominees presently await Senate confirmation, yet Mitch McConnell has done nearly everything in his power to ensure that Obama’s nominees will never even receive a Senate vote.

Because the government includes several agencies and boards whose members are required by law to be bipartisan, however, the party-out-of-power’s Senate leader traditionally gets to make a few nominations of his own.  One such McConnell nominee is Sharon Browne, a nominee to the Legal Services Corporation’s board who fundamentally disagrees with the Corporation’s mission of providing legal services to the poor. Browne has spent most of her career with a right-wing litigation shop that repeatedly fought to cut off funding for indigent legal services; and she was a plaintiff in a court case which claimed that a method of funding legal services for poor Californians violated that state’s law. In other words, McConnell has selected someone to help lead the Legal Services Corporation who is committed to destroying the Legal Services Corporation.

Yet despite Browne’s obvious unfitness for this job, and despite the fact that her patron has fought tooth and nail to prevent President Obama’s nominees from even receiving a Senate vote, Senate HELP Committee Chair Tom Harkin (D-IA) scheduled a committee vote on Browne’s nomination this Wednesday. Not one Democratic senator has taken a serious step to slow down Browne — such as placing a hold on the nomination — and she appears to be on track for confirmation.

Of course, it remains to be seen how Wednesday’s vote will go. Maybe HELP Committee Democrats will do the right thing and kill Browne’s nomination outright. It’s also possible that the HELP Committee members will lack sufficient spine to do so, but a minority of Senate Democrats will block Browne’s nomination by subjecting it to a McConnell-style filibuster. Or maybe Browne’s nomination will simply be rejected by the full Senate. Should the Senate majority allow Browne to be confirmed, however, they will send a clear message to Mitch McConnell and his ilk: “keep on blocking President Obama’s nominees, because there will be no consequences whatsoever if you do so.”

Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick (D-AZ) introduced a bill last week to cut pay for members of Congress by $8,700 a year — or five percent — and freeze their automatic cost-of-living increase. With Congress’ approval ratings “spiraling downward,” the cost-of-living pay increase “has become largely unpopular.” “Families across the country are getting by on lower wages…so why shouldn’t senators and representatives have to feel the same pinch?” Kirkpatrick said. The cut would be the first since the Great Depression:

The first-term congresswoman said she’s hopeful, given the enormous fiscal challenges facing the country, the measure can pass. She said she’s already started handing over 5 percent of her pay every month — or $870 — to help chisel away at the national debt. The monthly payment would have been less, but Kirkpatrick is, according to her office, paying extra to make up for the two months of 2010 she missed.

“I’m putting my money where my mouth is. I’m leading by example and I hope my colleagues will join me,” she said. [...]

“The last time Congress took a cut in pay was 77 years ago. I don’t know anyone who has not had a pay cut in 77 years.”

Members of Congress are currently paid $174,000 — leaders earn more — and Kirkpatrick’s office estimates the proposal would save $4.66 million a year. “Though it’s slight compared with the $12.5 trillion debt,” Kirkpatrick argued that it’s hard to justify the automatic pay increases in the current economic situation. So far, 21 lawmakers from both parties have signed on as co-sponsors and the measure is being considered in two House committees.

Tomorrow, conservative groups Americans for Prosperity (AFP) and Americans for Tax Reform are organizing a rally at the Georgia State Capitol to protest the state’s upcoming budget. The protest, like many recent anti-tax protests, is cloaked in an ideological veneer of fiscal conservatism and limited government. The invitation presents the rally, where Grover Norquist is speaking, as an opportunity to “cut spending and encourage economic growth.” But the Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s Jim Galloway notes that the fine print at the bottom of the invitation e-mail says the list serv was paid for “by Altria Clint Services on behalf of Philip Morris USA”:

Notably, part of the new budget is a proposal to levy a dollar-a-pack cigarette tax. Both groups involved in the protest have a long history of astroturfing for corporations to build popular support for their policies. AFP is led by Tim Phillips, a longtime astroturf lobbyist who has used evangelical and conservative groups to lobby on behalf of corporations like Enron and the gambling industry. AFP was founded and continues to be funded by oil billionaire David Koch, who has aggressively used his group to oppose clean energy reforms that might cut into his business.

Palin speaking in Calgary, Canada

In November of 2009, Sarah Palin — who is always suggesting that health care reform will lead to socialism — insisted that Canada needs to reform its health care system to “let the private sector take over.” But this past Saturday in Calgary, Canada — at “her first Canadian appearance since stepping down as governor of Alaska last summer” — Palin seemed to deviate from her fear of socialized Canadian medicine when she revealed that her family may have benefited from the Canadian system:

PALIN: We used to hustle over the border for health care we received in Canada. And I think now, isn’t that ironic?

This isn’t the first time Palin highlighted the difficulty of obtaining affordable health care in America. During the presidential campaign, Palin discussed how she and her husband Todd had “gone though periods of our life here with paying out-of-pocket for health coverage until Todd and I both landed a couple of good union jobs.” At the vice presidential debate, Palin recalled times in her marriage “in our past where we didn’t have health insurance and we know what other Americans are going through as they sit around the kitchen table and try to figure out how are they going to pay out-of-pocket for health care?”

Palin’s experience also highlights the fact that American medical-tourism to Canada is common, despite conservatives’ claims that Canada’s health care system drives Canadians into the states. “Every year, thousands of Americans undergo surgery in other countries” where they can receive the same care “at half the price.” “In 2007, an estimated 750,000 Americans traveled abroad for medical care; this number is anticipated to increase to six million by 2010″ — far outpacing the number of Canadians coming into the United States for medical treatment. It’s good to know that Palin was once one of them.

Cross-posted on The Wonk Room.