Arizona border businesses lose key Mexican clients / (Smash The Border)

Adalberto Lopez’ family-run musical instrument shop in the bustling Arizona border city of Nogales sells guitars and accordions to foot-stomping banda musicians and mariachis who cross up from Mexico to shop.But in mid-May, the music stopped in the store. Mexican customers who account for almost all its sales stayed away as part of a two-day boycott to repudiate Arizona’s tough new immigration law.”The street and my shop were empty,” said Lopez, of the “Day Without a Mexican” protest on May 14 and 15.The law may make life more difficult for border retailers already hobbled by the recession and long border crossing waits, and Arizona’s economy could take a hit from lost business.

But on a larger scale, experts believe the overall trade between the United States and Mexico, valued at around $1 billion a day, is unlikely to suffer from this latest wrinkle in the often strained U.S.-Mexico relations.Passed last month, the law requires state and local police to check the immigration status of those they reasonably suspect are in the country illegally. Opponents on both sides of the border say it is a mandate for racial profiling.

Mexico President Felipe Calderon sharply criticized it during a visit to Washington last week. Standing beside U.S. President Barack Obama, Calderon said Mexican immigrants make a “significant contribution to the economy and society of the United States” but many face discrimination “as in Arizona.”

The measure has triggered legal challenges, convention cancellations, and, most recently, snubs by some of the 65,000 Mexicans who cross into the desert state each day to work, visit family and shop, spending $7.4 million, according to a recent University of Arizona study.”The people in Mexico have been fairly insulted by this legislation, as have most Latinos in the state of Arizona,” said Bruce Bracker, president of the Downtown Merchants Association in Nogales, who said local shops’ sales fell 40 percent to 60 percent as Mexicans stayed home during the boycott.

NO TRADE SLOWDOWN

Obama has spoken out against the law, which is backed by a majority of Americans.The United States, Mexico and Canada created the world’s largest free trade block with the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1994, although the U.S.-Mexico trade relationship has been jarred by job losses and charges of protectionism.Trade between the two neighbors is already ruffled by a trucking row. Mexico is waiting for the United States to let its trucks circulate again on U.S. roads, ending a spat that led it to slap duties on $2.4 billion in U.S. goods.

But analysts and customs brokers say the furor over the state law is unlikely to disrupt the $21 billion annual flow in goods over the Arizona-Mexico border, between clients scattered across northwest Mexico and the United States.”Once you work so hard to get a business enterprise up and operating, how much are you willing to reverse that based upon something that someone relatively remote from you does?” said Rick Van Schoik, director of the North American Center for Transborder Studies at Arizona State University in Phoenix.

“Life goes on regardless of the newsy political conversation that’s going on,” he added.Customs brokers in Nogales, meanwhile, who clear goods ranging from semi-conductor chips to fresh produce headed over the border by truck and freight train, said their clients were more concerned about the sputtering economic recovery than the migrant law, which is due to come into effect on July 29.

“The economy is one thing, but that’s an ongoing situation for everyone,” said Nogales customs broker Terry Shannon Jr.”But I have not had any dialogue with my clients at this point where they have called me up and point-blank (asked) ‘What do you think of the law? Where are we going with this?'”

‘ONE MORE OBSTACLE’

But in cross-border retail, where sentiment plays a role in shaping Mexican shoppers’ spending, the outlook is more vexed, business groups say.Informal Mexican boycotts in protest at the measure have taken hold in other cities bordering Arizona, among them San Luis Rio Colorado, south of Yuma, where some traders are opting to head to California and Nevada to buy appliances and cars.”They’re looking for other options,” said Juan Manuel Villarreal, president of the city’s chamber of commerce, adding that it is still too early to quantify the impact.Authorities in Nogales  the state’s principal trade gateway to Mexico  were unable to place a dollar value on the recent boycott by Mexican shoppers, whose spending accounts for nearly a quarter of all jobs in surrounding Santa Cruz County, and almost half of taxable sales.

But Olivia Ainza-Kramer, president of the Nogales-Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce said a backlash from the law piled pressure on local shops, restaurants and hotels already hurt by the recession and delays of up to two hours for customers crossing up from Mexico.”This is one more obstacle that’s getting in the way,” she said.(Reuters)

new immigration law has prompted calls from civil rights groups for a boycott of the state’s industries and sports teams

Arizona’s draconian new immigration law has prompted calls from civil rights groups for a boycott of the state’s industries and sports teams . But don’t get too excited. It turns out that the new law is quite popular – and not just in Arizona. Two recent national polls – one by Gallup , the other by CBS – have found that a majority of Americans strongly approve of the state’s immigration crackdown.

In fact, some even some think it doesn’t go far enough. Have Americans become rightwing nuts? Hardly. But Washington’s endless dithering on immigration policy has the whole country at a boiling point. And if Arizonans want to vent their anger, well, bully for them, say voters – including a majority of independents, and even a solid third of Democrats . With the midterm elections just six months away, and Democratic fortunes fading fast, immigration is fast becoming an albatross for Obama.

Egged on by his disaffected Latino base, Obama decided to denounce the Arizona law. But voters obviously don’t agree with him. And Obama has also decided to urge Congress to begin work on comprehensive immigration reform, even though his key GOP ally, Senator Lindsey Graham, a moderate, isn’t playing ball. Graham warned Obama months ago that if he rammed healthcare reform through Congress, he could kiss immigration reform goodbye. Apparently, the president wasn’t listening. And neither was Senate majority leader Harry Reid, who is trailing both of his GOP opponents in the polls, and could well lose his seat this November.

Reid tried to rally Latino voters in Nevada last month by promising that Democrats would try to pass immigration reform this year, even if the GOP won’t help. Apparently, though, Reid forgot to consult with other Democrats. Because it turns out, post-Arizona, that there aren’t enough Democratic votes to pass immigration reform. In fact, Reid may not even be able to get the 50 votes necessary to bring a Democrat-only bill to the Senate floor – let alone secure its passage. What’s Obama to do? Right now, he’s caught between his angry and mobilised Latino base, which is demanding that he push forward with a plan to legalise undocumented immigrants, and mainstream voters, who seem to be leaning toward the GOP’s view that border and workplace enforcement should come first. It’s a recipe for disaster. Many Democrats – and not just Reid – need Latinos and other base groups to turn out in large numbers if they hope to prevail against Republicans this November – and preserve their party’s control of Congress. According to political experts, in some 35 congressional election contests in the West, a high Latino voter turn out could well provide the margin of difference. Also up for grabs, depending on Latino voting, are critical races in high-density Latino states like Florida.

There, a rising GOP star, Marco Rubio, who is Latino, is seeking to win a three-way Senate race in which former GOP Gov. Charlie Crist is running as an independent. On the other hand, there are just as many competitive districts in the South and Midwest where key swing voters overwhelmingly support the new Arizona crackdown, according to polls. Any move by Obama and the Democrats in the direction of legalization – even stepped criticism of Arizona’s new law, perhaps – could well doom Democratic fortunes there. For the GOP, meanwhile, it’s a question of how to balance the short-term political gain of holding out on immigration reform with the potential long-term damage to the party of appearing hostile to Latino aspirations. Everyone knows, Latinos especially, that the Arizona GOP was responsible for the Arizona law. And since many Republicans at the national level have refused to criticize the law, they are not winning any new friends among a key swing constituency they lost in 2008. But most Republicans are calculating that Latinos are just as concerned as mainstream voters about the deficit and the state of the economy – and won’t penalise the GOP for not focusing on immigration before November. And, in fact, like many Democrats, the GOP is also finding itself boxed in by its nativist wing. Just ask Senator John McCain, who has enthusiastically backed the state’s new immigration crackdown because of nativist pressure from GOP challenger, and Tea Party favorite, JD Hayworth. If he hadn’t, he wouldn’t stand a chance of getting re-elected, observers say. With only a narrow legislative window remaining – Congress takes a break on May 28, and when it returns, candidates start ginning up their election campaigns – serious action on immigration is unlikely. Reid, already under fire from the GOP for his grand-standing on immigration, has promised to focus on an energy, bill first and foremost.

Obama, meanwhile, recently took advantage of the annual White House “Cinco de Mayo” celebration to say that he still hoped that Congress would “start work” on immigration this year. In the game of verbal inches that often passes for Washington politics, that statement was taken as a positive sign. Of what, though, no one’s exactly sure.

Az immigration law, New push for reform

WASHINGTON – As hopes for Republican support fade, Senate Democratic leaders on Thursday unveiled a push for comprehensive immigration reform aimed in part at stopping Arizona’s tough immigration-enforcement law from spreading to other states.”Democrats and Republicans agree on one thing: The immigration system is broken and needs to be fixed,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said at a Capitol Hill news conference. “We are offering this framework as an invitation to our Republican colleagues: Work with us to solve this problem that has plagued us for far too long.”But that invitation was met with skepticism by some key Republicans, including Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who this week abandoned efforts to work with Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., on a bipartisan bill. He was the only Republican working on the bill.

When it was clear that Graham was out, Democrats moved ahead with their own proposal, in part to respond to calls for action by Hispanic rights groups. Hispanic voters, who helped propel Barack Obama into the White House in 2008 after he pledged to make immigration reform a priority, make up an important part of Democrats’ political base.

But it is unclear whether the president will throw his weight behind the latest proposal, which would require that border security be significantly tightened before the government could offer a path to citizenship to the estimated 11 million immigrants in the country illegally.On Wednesday, Obama said Congress may lack the “appetite” to take on immigration during an election year in which Democrats are expected to lose seats in the House and Senate. But in a statement Thursday, Obama praised the proposal.

“The next critical step is to iron out the details of a bill,” he said. “We welcome that discussion, and my administration will play an active role in engaging partners on both sides of the aisle to work toward a bipartisan solution that is based on the fundamental concept of accountability that the American people expect and deserve.”

Rodolfo Espino, an assistant professor of political science at Arizona State University, said the mixed messages could simply be the result of Obama not wanting to raise expectations too high.Espino warned that Congress’ window of opportunity to act on the hot-button topic is shrinking fast.”If you push this too close to primary- and general-election dates, I just don’t see something very good coming out with respect to a wise immigration-reform policy,” he said. “As you start pushing closer and closer to that Tuesday in November, you’re going to have some Democrats, particularly some of your moderate, vulnerable Democrats, who are going to start waffling a bit more.”

In a joint statement, Graham and Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., said the immigration proposal is political gamesmanship. “It poisons the well for those of us who are working toward a more secure border and responsible, bipartisan reform of our immigration laws,” the statement said.

But Schumer said he is serious about reform and is continuing to talk with moderate Republican senators about signing onto the proposal, which would, among other things, bar states and municipalities from enacting their own Arizona-style rules and penalties related to immigration because those rules could “undermine federal policies.”The Arizona law, signed last week by Gov. Jan Brewer, makes it a state crime to be in Arizona illegally and requires police and other law-enforcement agents to check documents of people they reasonably suspect to be illegal.A new Gallup Poll indicates that 39 percent of Americans support the law, 30 percent oppose it and 31 percent have not heard of it or have no opinion. The telephone survey was taken Tuesday and Wednesday and had a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.Attorney General Eric Holder is reviewing the law’s constitutionality.

Tamar Jacoby, president of the pro-reform ImmigrationWorks USA, has warned that a politically motivated, all-Democratic push for immigration reform could dramatically set back efforts to enact a new comprehensive policy. But she said it’s too soon to write off the latest Senate proposal as a political gambit and remains cautiously optimistic.”There’s still a chance that this isn’t just playing politics with it,” said Jacoby, whose organization backs reform from a center-right, pro-business perspective. “There are signs that they are still making some effort into making it a bipartisan push. Of course, it also still has a chance to go off the rails, but we so far are still walking that fine line.”

Democrats acknowledged they cannot pass the bill without help from at least a handful of Republican senators. House Democratic leaders have said they are waiting for the Senate to take action first.”The urgency of immigration reform cannot be overstated,” Schumer said.

President Barack Obama's major priorities dropped from the agenda of an election-year Congress facing voter disillusionment

WASHINGTON Immigration reform has become the first of President Barack Obama’s major priorities dropped from the agenda of an election-year Congress facing voter disillusionment. Sounding the death knell was Obama himself.The president noted that lawmakers may lack the “appetite” to take on immigration while many of them are up for re-election and while another big legislative issue – climate change – is already on their plate.

“I don’t want us to do something just for the sake of politics that doesn’t solve the problem,” Obama told reporters Wednesday night aboard Air Force One.Immigration reform was an issue Obama promised Latino groups that he would take up in his first year in office. But several hard realities – a tanked economy, a crowded agenda, election-year politics and lack of political will – led to so much foot-dragging in Congress that, ultimately, Obama decided to set the issue aside.

With that move, the president calculated that an immigration bill would not prove as costly to his party two years from now, when he seeks re-election, than it would today, even though some immigration reformers warned that a delay could so discourage Democratic-leaning Latino voters that they would stay home from the polls in November.Some Democrats thought pushing a bill through now might help their party. If it failed, they could blame Republican resistance, though in reality many Democrats didn’t want to deal with an immigration bill this year either.

Perhaps seeing the handwriting on the wall, top Senate Democrats released a legislative framework for immigration reforms anyway. The draft proposal, obtained by The Associated Press on Tuesday, called for, among other things, meeting border security benchmarks before anyone in the country illegally can become a legal permanent U.S. resident.By Wednesday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi offered little hope that the issue was still alive on Capitol Hill.”If there is going to be any movement in this regard, it will require presidential leadership, as well as an appetite, is that the word? … as well as a willingness to move forward in the Congress,” she said.House Republican leader John Boehner was more blunt. “There is not a chance that immigration is going to move through the Congress,” he said Tuesday.

Rep. Luis Gutierrez, the Democrats’ leading advocate for immigration reform, has said he voted for health care reform on the understanding that Obama and congressional Democrats would move a major immigration bill.Even though he would like to see Latinos turn out to vote for Democrats in 2010, Gutierrez said “many will probably decide to stay home.” However, he added, a strict, new immigration law in Arizona may change that dynamic. The law requires law enforcement officers to question anyone they suspect is in the country illegally.”On one hand you are not going to vote because you don’t believe people you voted for are doing a good enough job,” Gutierrez said. “Then you say, ‘I got to vote, because the enemy is so mean and vindictive, I got to get out there.'”The Hispanic vote is growing, largely because of Latinos’ increasing population. The 9.7 million Latinos who cast ballots in 2008 made up about 7.4 percent of the electorate, according to a 2009 Pew Research Center study.

Hispanic voters helped flip the battleground states of Colorado, Florida, Nevada and New Mexico from Republican to Democratic in the 2008 presidential election.But even though Latinos’ numbers have been increasing, in some parts of the country their portions of voting populations are not large enough to affect election outcomes.

Democrats hold a 254-177 majority in the House, with four vacancies. But 48 are in districts where Republican Arizona Sen. John McCain did better than Obama in the 2008 elections.Matt Angle, a Democratic political strategist focused on Texas, said it would be worse for Democrats to propose a bill that has no hope of passing or getting Republican support. Doing so would allow Republicans to cherry-pick parts of the bill to use against Democratic candidates, he said.

The Senate also has a number of competitive races, some in states with significant numbers of Hispanic voters, such as in Nevada, the home state of Majority Leader Harry Reid. Latinos are about 12-15 percent of likely voters there.”For Democrats it is critical they can deliver if they want to continue nurturing the support they want from this community,” said Clarissa Martinez De Castro, National Council of La Raza immigration and national campaigns director.(AP)

Democrats want to border security before legalization

WASHINGTON Democratic senators writing an immigration bill are circulating details about their emerging proposal that would secure the border before illegal immigrants could become legal U.S. residents.

The plan would increase the number of border and immigration enforcement agents, and lays out security benchmarks. The Associated Press obtained a copy of the draft legislation on Wednesday that is being developed by Sens.

Harry Reid of Nevada, Charles Schumer of New York and Robert Menendez of New Jersey.Arizona’s new strict immigration law has led to renewed demands for Congress to pass a comprehensive immigration bill.But in this election year, Republicans have been reluctant to consider an immigration bill.(AP)

bad behavior of Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback' Ben Roethlisberger resulted Wednesday in a six-game suspension by the NFL

bad behavior of Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback’ Ben Roethlisberger resulted Wednesday in a six-game suspension by the NFL and reportedly has triggered what once would have been unthinkable: The Steelers are testing the market to trade him.According to an ESPN report, Pittsburgh has been contacting teams selecting in the top 10 of this year’s draft, which begins at 4:30 p.m. PDT Thursday, to gauge interest in the two-time Super Bowl winner. By Wednesday afternoon, the network reported the Steelers had talked to St. Louis, San Francisco, Oakland, Jacksonville, Seattle and Cleveland. The 49ers are the only club without a top-10 pick (13 and 17).In a conference call with reporters, Steelers President Art Rooney II was vague on the subject but didn’t deny his team was shopping the quarterback, who last month was accused of sexually assaulting a 20-year-old college student in Georgia but will not face charges.

“As we’ve said before, we really can’t answer questions about trades, particularly this time of year,” Rooney said. “We go into every draft with the idea that we’re going to do anything we’ve got to do to make our team a better football team. We just have to stick with that and not discuss trades in advance.”What’s clear is the league and the Steelers have all but run out of patience with Roethlisberger, who last year faced similar accusations by a woman in Nevada. That case also did not bring criminal charges. Since then, reports have swirled that there’s a pattern of bad off-field behavior by the quarterback who once was among the NFL’s most popular players.Roethlisberger will be suspended without pay for six games — losing $2.8 million in salary — for violating the league’s personal-conduct policy, and he must undergo a “comprehensive behavioral evaluation by medical professionals,” the NFL said.

There is some flexibility to the suspension. It could be reduced to four games for good behavior after that behavioral evaluation has taken place, but Roethlisberger cannot attend any Steelers offseason activity until he completes the evaluation process.

“We’re trying to affect behavior here,” said NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, who has a reputation for disciplining players who run afoul of league policies. “We’re trying to make people understand their responsibility, live up to that standard, avoid making mistakes and use good judgment.”We’re trying to have early intervention so that we can avoid people having criminal activity, deal with the issues and try to get them straightened out so they can lead productive lives. And if they can be great NFL players, terrific.”Rooney said the Steelers support Goodell’s decision and that the club was willing to suspend Roethlisberger if the league did not.

“We do have high standards here,” Rooney said. “But by the same token, we understand that we’re in the people business and people make mistakes. And when they do, we have to follow the procedures.”So far, there’s no indication Roethlisberger plans to appeal the suspension. Rooney was part of the phone call Wednesday when Goodell informed Roethlisberger of the suspension.”His intent here is to follow the program the commissioner sets out,” Rooney said. “It’s our hope and our expectation that that’s what he’s going to do.”

A 7.2 magnitude earthquake struck northwest Mexico's Baja California state Sunday

A 7.2 magnitude earthquake struck northwest Mexico’s Baja California state Sunday, rattling Arizona and southern California, and leaving at least two dead and more than 100 injured in Mexico, authorities saidAt least one person was killed in a building collapse in Mexicali, Mexico, according to the assistant director of civil protection in Tijuana.

The other victim died when he ran from his residence into the street and was hit by a car, said Alfredo Escobedo, Baja state’s director of civil protection.

More than 140 people were treated at local hospitals, including five who were in critical condition, said Rigaberto Lasoya, medical coordinator for the state of Baja. Some were being treated outside because there’s no electricity and water at the main hospital, Lasoya said.

All injuries are concentrated in Mexicali, officials said.In California and Arizona, there were no immediate reports of injuries and only limited reports of damages.The quake struck at 3:40 p.m. (6:40 p.m. ET) about 110 miles east-southeast of Tijuana, Mexico, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.

Pictures from Mexicali, a major metropolitan area and the capital of Mexico’s Baja California state, showed sides ripped off buildings, telephone poles toppled, roads cracked and supermarket aisles strewn with food that had fallen off shelves.

The entire city has lost power, according to Alan Sandoval, Tijuana’s assistant director of civil protection

iReport.com: Water splashes out of San Diego, California,Residents across Southern California and Arizona reported serious ground shakes.”We have not felt a shake like that since about 1979,” Michelle Tapia told CNN from Brawley, California, approximately 23 miles north of the Mexican border.

iReport.com: Pots clang in San Diego, California, homeJoe Madison was shopping at a Wal-Mart in Palm Springs, California, when he felt the earthquake.”I felt the entire store move, and people went running for the exits,” he said.Madison said people gathered outside in the parking lot until the shaking stopped.”We felt it for about 30 seconds. It was rolling,” San Diego County sheriff’s Lt. Scott Ybarrondo told CNN. “Nothing fell off the walls here, but we have reports of pictures falling off walls elsewhere in the county.”

The quake was the largest in the Baja California area since 1992, the USGS reported.iReport.com: Damage in a bookstore in Palm Desert, CaliforniaThe 1992 quake, which struck in Landers, California, triggered an earthquake the next day in Nevada and another quake 11 days later in Southern California, according to USGS seismologist Lucy Jones. Both were 5.7 magnitude quakes.

Jones said Sunday’s quake also could trigger others in the coming days, though she said the relatively quiet hours after Sunday’s quake make other big quakes less likely.There have been three large aftershocks so far, including one that registered a 5.5 magnitude, and other smaller temblors, USGS said.Chandeliers swung and water sloshed around in swimming pools in the Los Angeles suburbs, witnesses reported, while posters to Twitter reported feeling the quake in Phoenix, Arizona.

Capt. Steve Ruda, a spokesman for the Los Angeles city fire department, said there were isolated power outages and a few people reported trapped in elevators, but no injuries or structural damage were reported.Nine minutes after the Mexico quake, a magnitude 4.1 quake rattled windows in Santa Rosa, north of San Francisco. No damage was reported there, and Susan Potter, a USGS geophysicist, told CNN that was a separate quake from the one that struck in the Baja California desert.The USGS initially reported that the Baja California quake had a 6.9 magnitude. The USGS upgraded the quake about an hour later.

difficult situation for Democrats in Congress is worsening as the 2010

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid

WASHINGTON An already difficult situation for Democrats in Congress is worsening as the 2010 political season opens.To minimize expected losses in next fall’s election, President Barack Obama’s party is testing a line of attack that resurrects George W. Bush as a boogeyman and castigates Republicans as cozy with Wall Street.Four House Democrats from swing districts have recently chosen not to seek re-election, bringing to 11 the number of retirements that could leave Democratic-held seats vulnerable to Republicans. More Democratic retirements are expected.

Over the holiday break, another Democrat, freshman Rep. Parker Griffith of Alabama, defected to the GOP. “I can no longer align myself with a party that continues to pursue legislation that is bad for our country, hurts our economy, and drives us further and further into debt,” said Griffith, who voted against Democrats’ three biggest initiatives in 2009: health care, financial regulation and reducing global warming.

In the Senate, at least four Democrats – including Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and five-term Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd – are in serious trouble. The party could also lose its grip on seats Obama held in Illinois and Vice President Joe Biden long occupied in Delaware.

Going into 2010, Democrats held a 257-178 majority in the House and an effective 60-40 majority in the Senate, including two independents who align themselves with Democrats.But they face an incumbent-hostile electorate worried about a 10 percent unemployment rate, weary of wars and angry at politicians of all stripes. Many independents who backed Democrats in 2006 and 2008 have turned away. Republicans, meanwhile, are energized and united in opposing Obama’s policies.

The one thing that heartens Democrats is that voters also don’t think much of the GOP, which is bleeding backers, lacking a leader and facing a conservative revolt.House Democrats began an ad campaign in December assailing Republicans for opposing legislation restructuring federal financial rules and recalling the final days of the Bush presidency, when the economy tanked.

“Remember? We all know we should never let this happen again,” the ad says. It lays into Republicans for voting “to let Wall Street continue the same risky practices that crippled retirement accounts and left taxpayers on the hook for $700 billion.”Maryland Rep. Chris Van Hollen, who heads the House Democrats’ campaign arm, said his party wants to remind voters who was on their side at a difficult time. “The Republican Party in Washington today is no different than the Republican Party that ran the Congress before,” he said.

But that was three years ago. Democrats have been in control since, and Bush is long gone. This is Obama’s country now. Democrats tried to use Bush against Republican Chris Christie in the New Jersey governor’s race in November – and Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine still lost.A top Democratic priority is minimizing losses among nearly four dozen seats the party now holds in moderate-to-conservative districts that Republican John McCain won in the 2008 presidential race. The most vulnerable in that group include Democratic Reps. Mary Jo Kilroy in Ohio, Harry Teague in New Mexico, Frank Kratovil in Maryland, Tom Perriello in Virginia and Travis Childers in Mississippi.

Reps. Bart Gordon and John Tanner, both of Tennessee, were in that group until they chose to retire. So was Griffith, before he switched to the GOP. Retirement announcements from Reps. Dennis Moore of Kansas and Brian Baird of Washington put two more Democratic seats in swing-voting districts on the GOP’s target list.

Democrats insist that Gordon, Tanner, Moore and Baird are leaving for personal reasons and are not the first ripple in a wave of retirements akin to 1994 when 28 Democrats chose not to run, and Republicans won control in part by winning 22 of those seats.”Democrats are beginning to see the writing on the wall, and instead of choosing to fight in a difficult political environment, they are taking a pass and opting for retirement,” said Ken Spain, a spokesman for the House GOP’s campaign arm.

The GOP will be defending at least a dozen open seats because of retirements, with several lawmakers leaving the House to run for higher office.The situation for Democrats in the Senate is nearly as grim as it is for them in the House.Democrats crowed after six Senate Republicans – four from swing states Florida, Ohio, Missouri and New Hampshire and two from GOP-leaning Kansas and Kentucky – announced retirements.

Spirited GOP challenges are now expected in all six states, and Republicans say they are optimistic they can retain the seats. An emboldened GOP also is looking to put a pair of senior Senate Democrats out of office.Reid, who is seeking a fifth term, is faring poorly in surveys in a hypothetical matchup with Nevada GOP chairwoman Sue Lowden, one of several Republicans competing for a chance to challenge him.

Dodd, the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee chairman who has taken heat for a discounted VIP mortgage loan he got from a subprime lender, has been consistently behind potential GOP challenger Rob Simmons in Connecticut polls. Simmons, a former House member, has his own challenger in World Wrestling Entertainment co-founder Linda McMahon, who also is seeking the Republican nomination for Dodd’s seat.

Also vulnerable are Sen. Blanche Lincoln, a moderate Democrat in GOP-leaning Arkansas, and Sen. Michael Bennet in Colorado, who was appointed when Ken Salazar became Obama’s interior secretary.

Republicans have high hopes for picking up Senate seats in Illinois and Delaware that were held by the president and vice president, respectively. Neither of their appointed successors is seeking election to the seats.

Early polling shows GOP Rep. Mark Kirk leading among Republican candidates in Illinois. Veteran GOP Rep. Mike Castle, a former two-term governor, is running for the Senate in Delaware. Biden’s son, Democratic state Attorney General Beau Biden, is considering whether to challenge Castle. (AP)

The number of miners killed on the job in the United States fell for a second straight year to 34

mining machine breaks through a wall of coal

FRANKFORT, Ky. The number of miners killed on the job in the United States fell for a second straight year to 34, the fewest since officials began keeping records nearly a century ago.That was down from the previous low of 52 in 2008.U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration documents show 18 of the deaths occurred in coal mines, down from 29 in 2008; and 16 were in gold, copper and other types of mines, down from 22 in 2008. Most involved aboveground truck accidents on mine property, though some of the deaths resulted from rock falls and being struck by machinery.Obama administration mine safety czar Joe Main said the numbers are encouraging, but he won’t be satisfied until no miners are killed on the job.”I think that’s accomplishable, if you look at where we came from, and where we’ve come to,” Main said.The latest statistics are vastly improved, he said, from a century ago when hundreds, sometimes thousands of miners were killed each year.The deadliest year in recorded U.S. coal mining history was 1907, when 3,242 deaths were reported. That year, the nation’s most deadly mine explosion killed 358 people near Monongah, W.Va.Main credits the decrease in deaths over the past year to beefed-up enforcement and stricter regulations in the wake of a series of mining disasters over the past four years in Kentucky, Utah and West Virginia.

In 2006, 73 miners were killed, including 12 who died in a methane explosion at the Sago Mine in West Virginia and five who died in a similar explosion at the Darby Mine in Kentucky. In 2007, 67 miners died, including six who were killed in the collapse of the Crandall Canyon mine in Utah.Coal states reacted by revamping their mine safety laws, and Congress toughened federal rules that that brought a variety of advances. Among the improvements are caches of oxygen stashed in underground mines in case miners are trapped, refuge chambers to provide shelter in emergencies, and a communications system to allow underground miners to talk with colleagues on the surface.

Steve Earle, United Mine Workers of America international vice president for the Midwest, said while those were important improvements, getting inspectors into the field is the key.”I can say without reservation that the safest day coal miners have is when inspectors are in the mines,” he said. “The more we can put our inspectors in the mines, the safer those mines will become and the closer we will come to zero fatalities.”

Mine safety advocate Tony Oppegard, who has successfully lobbied to triple the number mine inspections conducted in Kentucky, said mining remains a dangerous occupation.”Everyone who’s involved in mine safety has to be extremely vigilant,” he said. “There’s very small margin for error in coal mining. The smallest mistake can cost a miner his life.”Kentucky led the nation in mining deaths last year with six in coal mines and one in a limestone quarry. That was followed by West Virginia and Alabama, each of which had three coal miners killed.

Illinois, Louisiana, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Texas each had two miners killed in coal, salt, alumina, zinc or sand and gravel operations. Arizona, Arkansas, California, Georgia, Iowa, Nevada, Ohio, Virginia and Puerto Rico had one miner killed in either clay, copper, gold, lime or sand and gravel operations.

“It’s never positive when you have numbers like that, but it could have been worse,” said David Moss, spokesman for the Kentucky Coal Association. “We’re always striving for that goal of zero. That’s what we work toward every single day.”Main credited cooperation between regulatory agencies, coal companies and miners with making mines safer, which led the decrease in workplace deaths.”It is historic,” he said. “And it does tell us we can achieve a point in time when we have no fatalities.”(AP)

Scanners force trade-off between privacy, security

the security gate at San Francisco International Airport in San Francisco

SAN FRANCISCO  As Ronak Ray hunted for his flight gate, he prepared for the prospect of a security guard peering through his clothes with a full body scanner. But Ray doesn’t mind: what he gives up in privacy he gets back in security.”I think it’s necessary,” said Ray, a 23-year-old graduate student who was at San Francisco International Airport to fly to India. “Our lives are far more important than how we’re being searched.”Despite controversy surrounding the scans, Ray’s position was typical of several travelers interviewed at various airports Wednesday by The Associated Press.Airports in five other U.S. cities are also using full body scanners at specific checkpoints instead of metal detectors. In addition, the scanners are used at 13 other airports for random checks and so-called secondary screenings of passengers who set off detectors.

But many more air travelers may have to get used to the idea soon. The Transportation Security Administration has ordered 150 more full body scanners to be installed in airports throughout the country in early 2010, agency spokeswoman Suzanne Trevino said.Dutch security officials have said they believe such scanners could have detected the explosive materials Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab of Nigeria is accused of trying to ignite aboard a Detroit-bound Northwest Airlines flight Christmas Day.Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport has 15 full body scanners, but none were used to scan Abdulmutallab when he boarded. In Europe and the U.S., privacy concerns over the scanners’ ability to see through clothing have kept them from widespread use.

The technology was first used about two years ago to make it easier for airport security to do body searches without making physical contact with passengers.The idea of an electronic strip search did not bother Judy Yeager, 62, of Sarasota, Fla., as she prepared to depart Las Vegas. She stood in the full-body scanner Wednesday afternoon and held her arms up as a security official guided her through the gray closet-sized booth.”If it’s going to protect a whole airplane of people, who gives a flying you-know-what if they see my boob whatever,” Yeager said. “That’s the way I feel, honest to God.”George Hyde, of Birmingham, Ala., who was flying out of Salt Lake City with his wife, Patsy, on Wednesday after visiting their children and grandchildren in Park City, Utah.”I’d rather be safe than be embarrassed,” Hyde said. Neither he nor his wife had been through a body scanner before.”We’re very modest people but we’d be willing to go through that for security.”

Trevino said the TSA has worked with privacy advocates and the scanners’ manufacturers to develop software that blurs the faces and genital areas of passengers being scanned. In all cases, passengers are not required to be scanned by the machine but can opt for a full body pat-down instead.At Salt Lake City International Airport, fewer than 1 percent of passengers subjected to the scanner chose the pat-down since the machine was installed in March, said Dwane Baird, a TSA spokesman in Salt Lake City.On Tuesday, some 1,900 people went through the scanner and just three chose not to, he said.Critics of the scanners said the option to opt out was not enough.”The question is should they be used indiscriminately on little children and grandmothers,” said Republican U.S. Rep. Tom McClintock of California. McClintock co-sponsored a bill approved by the House 310-118 in June prohibiting the use of full body scanners for primary screenings. The bill is pending in the Senate.

He said the devices raised serious concerns regarding constitutional protections against unreasonable searches.”There’s no practical distinction between a full body scan and being pulled into a side room and being ordered to strip your clothing.”To further protect passenger privacy, security officers looking at the images are in a different part of the airport and are not allowed to take any recording devices into the room with them, Trevino said. The images captured by the scanners cannot be stored, transmitted or printed in any way.But the TSA still has some public relations work ahead of it, judging by the reactions of passengers in Albuquerque, N.M., who were worried about what would happen to their images once they were scanned.”Are they going to be recorded or do they just scan them and that’s the end of them? How are these TSA people going to be using them? That’s a real concern for me,” said Courtney Best-Trujillo of Santa Fe, N.M., who was flying to Los Angeles on Wednesday.

The six airports where full body scanners are being used for what TSA calls “primary screenings” are: Albuquerque, N.M.; Las Vegas, Nev.; Miami, Fla.; San Francisco; Salt Lake City, Utah; and Tulsa, Okla.The remainder of the machines are being used for secondary screenings in Atlanta, Ga.; Baltimore/Washington; Denver, Colo.; Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas; Indianapolis, Ind.; Jacksonville and Tampa, Fla.; Los Angeles; Phoenix, Ariz.; Raleigh-Durham, N.C.; Richmond, Va.; Ronald Reagan Washington National; and Detroit, Mich.

Though most passengers interviewed by The Associated Press felt security trumped other concerns, Bruna Martina, 48, a physician from the coast of Venezuela, said the scanners still made her feel uncomfortable.”I think there has to be another way to control people, or to scan them, but not like this,” she said as she headed back home after a vacation in Miami with her husband and two sons. She also does not think the scanners will thwart another attack.”They’ll find another way,” Martina said. “There is always somebody cleverer than the rest.”(Ap)