Product Safety is a game changer

Representatives Bill Delahunt (D-Mass.) and Brad Miller (D-N.C.) introduced legislation to create the Financial Product safety commission in response to the fact that according to Delahunt, there is no single federal agency that has as its core mission and its primary objective the protection of the American consumer. “It’s a game changer; a paradigm shift in terms of our economy,” said Delahunt.

Delahunt stated that, “It’s no secret that American families today are literally drowning in debt,” and “one in seven American families are dealing with a debt collector.” Delahunt explained that the new commission will be aimed at becoming a “watchdog” for ensuring that financial products sold to consumers are safe, responsible, accountable, and transparent. The commission is a “a first step to finding solutions to protect the American family.”

Miller confessed that he was skeptical when he embraced the idea of this becoming law but he now believes that this is a very realistic proposal. “The outrage over the AIG bonuses was the result of a lot that is going on in the American economy,” said Miller. He explained that the middle class is trapped in debt and this legislation would allow leaders to make an honest living and make credit available to consumers who need to borrow money, but it would not allow lenders to make a killing by duping consumers.

Making American protection compatible with Iraqi sovereignty

At the House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on the possible extension of the UN Mandate for Iraq, Chairman Bill Delahunt (D-Mass.) talked about reviewing the role that the Iraqi Parliament expected to play in the approval of the extension of the UN Mandate to December 31, 2008. Delahunt explained that members to Prime Minister al-Maliki and the UN Security Council called for the inclusion of a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops, otherwise they would not support the extension of the UN Mandate.

Delehunt also explained that despite the recent dramatic change in public statements by both Iraqi and U.S. executive branches concerning a timetable for withdrawal of American troops by 2010, it is still “very much in question” whether an agreement can be reached by December 31, 2008. He said that members in the Iraqi Parliament also have expressed that they feel they have not been adequately informed as to the substance of the agreement and its implications for Iraq sovereignty. Delahunt said that from the beginning, it has been his position that a short-term extension of the UN Mandate is the best course of action, saying that “these issues are too important to be dealt with through a hasty, secretive approach.” He stressed that everyone should accept the need for a reasonable and responsible withdrawal of U.S. troops and recognize and respect the aspirations of the Iraqi people for sovereignty, and insist on legal protection for American troops.

Former Prime Minister of Iraq, Ayad Allawi, explained that Iraq is in the process of negotiating a security agreement with the U.S. to organize the security relations between the two countries and agree on the framework for final withdrawal. This agreement, Allawi said, should include diplomatic, economic, cultural, educational, and security aspects, and needs to be transparent and attain the approval of the Iraqi Parliament and people. Allawi explained that the security agreement has reached a deadlock and other options need to be explored. Extension of the UN Security Council resolution under Chapter 7, Allawi said, is an option, but it may be unacceptable in Iraq, while a UN Security Council resolution under Chapter 6 needs to be further studied.

Allawi said that it is also very important to discuss a time frame for reduction of U.S. forces. He said a reduction must be linked to measures of progress in Iraq and the conditions prevailing in the country. Iraq needs an army, police and security forces with commitment to defending the country’s sovereignty and unity, Allawi said, and needs America’s help in building them.

Dr. Steven Kull, the director of the Program on International Policy Attitudes, said that Iraqi people are showing signs of impatience with the pace of U.S. withdrawal. He explained that 144 of the 275 members of Parliament signed a letter calling for a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops, mostly due to the attitudes of the Iraqi people. Kull said that if the U.S. government wants to play a constructive role in the future of Iraq it must understand the dynamics of public opinion and the forces of the political universe within which Iraqi leaders are operating. He also explained that the U.S. has effectively occupied Iraq, but has not effectively liberated it. Kull said that the U.S. needs to address the feeling held by most Iraqis that they are not being treated as a sovereign power.

House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on International Organizations, Human Rights, and Oversight holds a hearing on Iraq "Declaration of Principles"

Chairman Bill Delahunt (D-Mass) discussed the “Declaration of Principles” issued by the Bush administration on November 26th, 2007. He expressed disappointment with the administration over the declaration, saying that details of the document were kept secret and worried that it suggested an indefinite military presence in Iraq. He said that administration officials declined three separate invitations to speak before the subcommittee regarding the declaration and that the only official to discuss the declaration was Secretary of Defense Robert Gates during a hearing two days ago.

Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) said that he has been a strong supporter of the Iraq war since the invasion but he mimicked Delahunt’s message saying that the administration’s unwillingness to cooperate with Congress “breeds mistrust” in Washington and with Americans. He said that the administration may have good intentions but that the “cloak of secrecy” surrounding discussion of the declaration “undermines the success to implement the strategy.”

Michael J. Glennon, professor of international Law at Tufts University spoke before the subcommittee saying that the declaration was “ambiguous.” He said that it could be construed to imply a longterm military presence in Iraq and that under the constitution, the President must seek Congressional approval before enacting such provisions.