Obama Tells Jobs Council Of 'Substantial Progress'

WASHINGTON January 17, 2012, 11:41 am ET

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama says his administration has made "substantial progress" in embracing outside ideas on how to solidify the economic recovery.

In comments to his jobs council, Obama sought to show that the administration was taking seriously the recommendations of the broad panel of business leaders. He spoke of success in streamlining the permitting processes and cutting regulations. And he hailed his own attempt to get more power from Congress to shrink the cost of government.

The strength of the U.S. economy will play a huge role in determining whether Obama wins a second term.

Obama assured members of his Council on Jobs and Competitiveness that their proposals are not gathering dust.

Separately, on Thursday in Florida, he will announce a new strategy to boost tourism and travel.

Newt Gingrich said Obama put more people on food stamps than any other U.S. president.

Getting passengers to switch from the hometown carrier could be a challenge for Southwest.

Aid groups say money in Haiti is being well-spent; Haitians are not so sure.

Judicial Vacancies Rising Under Obama, Study Says

Has Obama Waged A War On Religion?

Enlarge Joe Drivas/Getty Images

Some political and religious leaders say there is a White House-led war against religion.

Joe Drivas/Getty Images Some political and religious leaders say there is a White House-led war against religion.

Americans' religious liberties are under attack — or at least that's what some conservatives say.

Newt Gingrich warns the U.S. is becoming a secular country, which would be a "nightmare." Rick Santorum says there's a clash between "man's laws and God's laws." And in a campaign ad, Rick Perry decried what he called "Obama's war on religion," saying there is "something wrong in this country when gays can serve openly in the military but our kids can't openly ... pray in school."

Of course, children can pray in school, but Perry is echoing a larger argument: that religious freedom is at risk. The story is much more complicated than either side makes out.

If you're looking for evidence that the Obama administration is hostile to faith, conservatives say, the new health care law is Exhibit A. The law requires employers to offer health care plans that cover contraceptives. Churches don't have to, but religiously affiliated charities, hospitals and colleges do. That doesn't sit well with the Catholic monks at Belmont Abbey College in North Carolina.

"When the government said to them, you're going to have to fund contraception, sterilization, in violation of your deeply held religious convictions, the monks at Belmont Abbey College knew that they just couldn't do that," says attorney Hannah Smith at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.

The college sued in federal court last November.

"This is not just about health care," Smith says. "This is really about government coercion of religious individuals and institutions."

Religious conservatives see an escalating war with the Obama White House. One Catholic bishop called it "the most secularist administration in history." Another bishop says it is an "a-theocracy." Bishop William Lori of Bridgeport, Conn., who heads the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' new Ad Hoc Committee on Religious Liberty, believes the First Amendment is clear: The government cannot make people choose between obeying the law and following their faith.

I think [the Obama administration has] aggressively protected religious liberty in some issues and failed to protect it in other issues. But they're not hostile.

- Douglas Laycock, constitutional lawyer

"If the government can force a church's hand and force it to violate its cherished beliefs," he asks, "then what's next?"

Because of that kind of force, Lori notes, Catholic Charities in Illinois shut down its adoption services rather than place children with same-sex couples, as the state required. The church also lost a federal contract to aid victims of human trafficking because the administration favored groups that provide contraceptive and abortion services. Lori admits no one has a right to federal money, but he says the government should accommodate religious beliefs.

"We don't have a constitutional right to a contract, but we do have a constitutional right not to be discriminated against because we're following our own convictions," he says.

"I am tired of hearing religious right organizations or the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church play the victim," says Rob Boston at Americans United for the Separation of Church and State.

"All we're really seeing right now is a very modest attempt from the Obama administration to put some controls on how some government money is spent when it flows to religious organizations," he says. "It's a very reasonable thing that quite frankly should have happened a long time ago."

Douglas Laycock, a constitutional lawyer who argues cases on behalf of religious groups, said he doesn't think the administration is hostile to religion. He says the administration takes the issues case by case.

"I think they've aggressively protected religious liberty in some issues and failed to protect it in other issues," Laycock says. "But they're not hostile. The hostility is in parts of the political culture — particularly in the gay rights movement and the pro-choice movement."

It's a larger culture war, he says — a fight that religious conservatives are worried about losing, particularly over gay rights. More and more people favor civil unions or marriage for gay couples, and more states are recognizing them.

This new reality troubles Mathew Staver, founder of the conservative law group, Liberty Counsel.

"I believe the greatest threat to religious liberty is the clash between religious liberty and LGBT rights," he says.

Staver says as rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people make gains, religious conservatives are having to set aside their convictions. A Christian counselor was penalized for refusing to advise gay couples. A court clerk in New York was told to issue same-sex marriage licenses, despite religious reservations. A wedding photographer was sued for refusing to shoot a same-sex wedding. Staver says these people aren't trying to impose their religious views on others.

"What people of faith don't want to do, however, is be forced to participate in something that literally cuts to the very core of their belief."

Boston says of course religious believers want to impose their views on the world — witness the fight against same-sex marriage. But he says under the law, people can't discriminate based on their religious beliefs, any more than a restaurant owner can cite the Bible in refusing to serve black customers. He says the solution is simple.

"If you don't want to serve the public, don't open a business saying you will serve the public."

What's happened in the past decade, Laycock says, is that the culture wars have become a zero sum game. When one side wins, the other loses.

"The conservative religious groups want to take away all the liberty of the pro-choice and gay-rights people, and the pro-choice and gay-rights people want to take away all the liberty of the conservative religious groups," he says. "Neither side seems interested in the American tradition of 'live and let live' and protect the liberty of both sides."

And Laycock sees little chance of a detente, particularly in an election year.

Religion

Subscribe to Religion podcast via:

Or use this URL:

close

Weekend Edition Sunday–

Americans' religious liberties are under attack — or at least that's what some conservatives say.

View the original article here

Keystone Oil Pipeline Deadline Puts Obama In A Pinch

Nati Harnik/AP

TransCanada hoped to build a pipeline under the Niobrara River in north central Nebraska, seen here in October 2010. The pipeline's route has been challenged by environmental advocates.

When Congress gave the White House a tight 60-day deadline for approving or rejecting the controversial Keystone project, it seemed like a Christmas gift to TransCanada, the company building the pipeline that would carry oil from Canada all the way to the Gulf of Mexico.

But TransCanada says it didn't ask for this deadline and it doesn't know how to handle this unwanted gift.

"We're heading into uncharted territory," says James Millar, a TransCanada spokesman.

We have essentially become the lightning rod for that broader debate around the consumption of fossil fuels.

- James Millar, TransCanada spokesman

Last year, environmentalists and ranchers in Nebraska succeeded in delaying the Keystone XL pipeline by arguing that it put a huge aquifer at risk. The company is looking for a new route through Nebraska, and it doesn't expect to have it pinned down until next fall.

The unrequested deadline was just the latest consequence of how politicized the Keystone pipeline has become.

"We have essentially become the lightning rod for that broader debate around the consumption of fossil fuels," says Millar.

Environmentalists made Keystone their prime target last year. Their protests helped persuade the president to delay a decision on whether the pipeline is in the national interest.

Environmentalists' biggest concern is that the massive amount of oil that would flow through the pipeline would come from tar sands, and it takes a lot more energy to pull oil out of tar sands than it does to pump a well. That translates into extra greenhouse gas pollution.

'It's Not Just A Pipeline; It's A Lifeline'

In recent weeks, Republicans and some labor unions have turned the project into another kind of litmus test — one that measures the president's commitment to creating new jobs.

David Mallino, a lobbyist for the Laborers International Union of North America, attributes all the controversy around the project to its enormous size.

"Seven billion dollars of private investment don't come along every day; they don't come along every year or every decade," says Mallino.

So what's a president to do, especially when key parts of his political base are on opposite sides of the issue?

People like Mallino are urging the White House to take advantage of the deadline and give the project a quick green light.

"The pipeline itself is essential to putting thousands of our members back to work. It's not just a pipeline; it's a lifeline for those members. This is the right thing to do," says Mallino.

TransCanada Committed For The Long Haul

But many environmentalists and legal scholars say President Obama can't approve it. It would be like granting a building permit when a construction company hasn't chosen a lot yet.

The State Department had warned Republicans that their deadline would make it unable to issue a permit.

"It would be essentially defenseless in a lawsuit if it tried to make a decision having acknowledged that it doesn't have adequate information," says Patrick Parenteau, an environmental law professor at Vermont Law School.

Environmental groups say they would sue if the Obama administration did approve the project.

Some energy experts think the president will reject the project this round but that will not be the end of it, because the Canadian oil is so valuable.

"The sequence of events could easily be: The president rejects this pipeline, we then have a crisis in the Middle East, we suddenly realize we're not having this Canadian oil when we could have, and then people are angry about that," says Amy Myers Jaffe, director of energy research at Rice University's Baker Institute.

A steady flow of Canadian oil through the pipeline would protect the United States from the potential disruptions of oil supply from unstable countries in the Middle East, Jaffe adds.

If the short deadline forces the Obama administration to reject Keystone on legal grounds, TransCanada would probably reapply.

In 2010, TransCanada completed a major pipeline — the Keystone — which runs from Alberta to Illinois. The company is now planning a second line, called the Keystone XL, that would run from Alberta to Nebraska with an extension from Oklahoma to the refineries on the Gulf Coast. But the company is now faced with the challenge of rerouting the pipeline to avoid ecologically-sensitive land in Nebraska.

The company says it's committed to the project for the long haul, no matter what political and legal storms it has to weather.

Energy

Subscribe to Energy podcast via:

Or use this URL:

close

All Things Considered–

The economic picture in Greece is already bleak.

Cheap natural gas due to fracking makes more expensive forms of renewable energy less attractive.

The president risks political attacks if he rejects the project — and legal hurdles if he OKs it.

View the original article here