Retired Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez to Run as Democrat for Seat Hutchison is Vacating

AP

Retired Army Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez

WASHINGTON -- Democratic officials said Monday that retired Army Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez is expected to run for U.S. Senate in Texas, giving Democrats a high-profile recruit to fill the seat being vacated by GOP Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison.

The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss private conversations with Sanchez.

Sanchez is a retired Army lieutenant general and was commander of coalition forces in Iraq when revelations about prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib became public. He gave up his command in June 2004 and has since maintained that he never authorized torture at the prison. He retired from the military in 2006, blaming the Abu Ghraib scandal for his retirement.

Sanchez would become the first prominent Democrat to seek Hutchison's seat. Last week, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., who runs the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said she expected to field a strong candidate in Texas. Two Democratic officials with first-hand knowledge of Murray's plans, said she was referring to Sanchez.

The Associated Press reached Sanchez by telephone at his home in San Antonio, but Sanchez asked the reporter to call back in a few minutes. When the number was dialed again, the phone was turned off and went straight to voicemail. He did not immediately return a message.

Sanchez so far is the only prominent Democrat in the race to replace Hutchison, Republicans have queuing up for a shot at the seat. Front-runners include wealthy Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, former Railroad Commissioner Michael Williams and current Commissioner Elizabeth Ames Jones. Other GOP candidates include former Dallas Mayor Tom Leppert and former Texas Solicitor General Ted Cruz. Hutchison announced in January she would retire at the end of her current term.

Despite the taint of the Abu Ghraib scandal, Democrats believe Sanchez would be a credible candidate. They cite his military background, centrist bona fides, ability to tap into Texas money, a growing pool of Hispanic voters and a potentially fractious Republican primary.

Matt Canter, a spokesman for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, issued a statement in which he spoke warmly of the retired general.

"General Sanchez has spent his entire life serving our country, and there's no question he would be a strong candidate if he decides to continue to serve his country in the US Senate," Canter said. "He has a tremendous life story, growing up poor, rising to the rank of general in the Army, and bravely leading more than a hundred thousand troops in both Gulf Wars."

Sanchez served as the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq from 2003 to 2004. That time included the revelations about abuse at Abu Ghraib. Sanchez was never directly linked to wrongdoing -- and has maintained he had no knowledge about events at the prison -- but the issue is certain to come up if enters the race.

Since leaving the military, Sanchez has written a book and been publicly critical about U.S. military strategy in Iraq, particularly the surge. He has also called himself a "progressive" in one interview as well as a fiscal conservative.

Print Email Share Comments Recommend Tweet View ArticleLeave a CommentSort: NewestSort: Oldest Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus. You must login to comment.

View Article

View All Comments

Latest Politics VideosMore »

View the Original article

Cities, space centers, museums fight for retired shuttle

States bid for space shuttle orbiterSTORY HIGHLIGHTSSeveral sites are vying to be the final homes of the retiring space shuttlesThe shuttles Discovery, Endeavour and Atlantis carry historic and economic valueNASA administrator Charlie Bolden will announce Tuesday where the shuttles will goApril 12 marks the date of the first human space flight and, 20 years later, the first shuttle flight Kennedy Space Center, Florida (CNN) -- Russian Cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin became the first human in space -- the date was April 12, 1961. Twenty years later on April 12, astronauts John Young and Robert Crippen got on board the space shuttle Columbia, a craft that looked more like a plane that a rocket ship. It launched an entirely new era in space flight.

Now, on the anniversary of those two historic events, NASA is scheduled to announce where the retiring orbiters Discovery, Endeavour and Atlantis will call home.

NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden will make the announcement Tuesday during a ceremony at the Kennedy Space Center commemorating that first flight of Columbia on April 12, 1981. NASA officials say the orbiter Atlantis, being readied for the final shuttle flight this summer, will be the backdrop for the announcement. Hundreds of center workers are expected to attend -- many of them will likely lose their jobs when the shuttle program ends.

Because the announcement is being made at Kennedy, the speculation is that the visitor center here will be awarded one of the shuttles. It is one of more than 20 locations around the country with collective fingers crossed.

The drama mirrors the bidding to host an Olympic games. In Texas, home of the Johnson Space Center, members of that state's delegation publicly lobbied for a shuttle. Rep. Pete Olson, R-Texas, said during a news conference, "No city in the world deserves an orbiter more than Houston, Texas."

View the Original article

NYC, L.A., Kennedy Space Center, Smithsonian to get the 4 retired space shuttles

PreviousLone mortar shell in Charleston opens 150th anniversary of Civil War

NextFormer Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak is hospitalized

To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters

View the Original article

Retired Justice O'Connor Draws Criticism Over Political, Judicial Activities

AP

Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor speaks at the Women's Conference Oct. 26, 2010, in Long Beach, Calif.

WASHINGTON -- Retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor continues to hear cases in U.S. appeals courts, while also playing a role in public policy issues. Her critics say she should do one or the other, but not both. 

O'Connor, 81, was forced to apologize for 50,000 recorded telephone calls made to Nevada voters in which she supported a ballot measure to change the way state judges are selected. O'Connor said she did not authorize the calls featuring her recorded voice, much less their post-midnight delivery. But she also defended her involvement in the campaign that included her appearance in a television commercial. 

In September, federal judges in Iowa stayed away from a conference on judicial elections at which O'Connor spoke in the midst of another campaign over ballot issues. The judges had received an informal opinion that their presence would violate the judiciary's ethics code. 

Most recently, O'Connor hosted an after-hours reception at the court that was billed as a celebration of Bristol Bay in Alaska. But the featured speakers, other than O'Connor, were opponents of a proposed Alaskan copper and gold mine. They were in Washington to lobby lawmakers and regulators against the proposed Pebble Mine. 

Arthur Hellman, an ethics expert at the University of Pittsburgh law school, said O'Connor should consider stopping her participation in court cases if she "wants to engage in this level of political or politically related activity." 

Partisan-tinged questioning of conduct by high court justices has grown. 

Liberal interest groups have faulted Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas for speaking at a private dinner hosted by Charles Koch, one of two energy-company-owning brothers who, liberal groups say, have too much sway on policymakers. 

Some liberals have called on Thomas to sit out the expected high court fight over the health care law because of his wife's public criticism of the law. Some conservatives say Justice Elena Kagan should not take part in the health care case because of her work in the Obama administration before joining the court. 

O'Connor has traveled the country since her retirement in 2006 to criticize costly election campaigns for state judges, promote enhanced civics education for schoolchildren and advocate for Alzheimer's research. Her husband, John, died in 2009 of complications from Alzheimer's disease. 

Her primary focus has been on judicial independence, which she believes is harmed by electing judges. 

At the same time, she has heard cases on appeal since her retirement. It is not uncommon for retired justices to sit with federal appeals courts from time to time. Justice David Souter, who left the court in 2009, has heard cases with the Boston-based court. 

Through the end of March, O'Connor had written two appellate decisions and joined the majority in a half-dozen others this year. None of the cases involved judicial elections or the fate of the Alaska bay. 

The continuing judicial work allows O'Connor, who earns $213,900, to receive salary increases that are tied to inflation. Judges who stop hearing cases receive a pension equal to their final annual salary as a full-time judge, but are excluded from subsequent cost-of-living increases. 

Last week, O'Connor was the host of a Supreme Court reception "to celebrate the economic, cultural and ecological values of Alaska's Bristol Bay Watershed." 

Opponents of the proposed huge mine near the bay fear it will devastate the world's largest wild sockeye salmon fishery. The Environmental Protection Agency recently said it would study potential effects from the mine. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson attended and briefly spoke at the reception. 

O'Connor declined to answer questions for this story. But the head of the Wild Salmon Center, lead sponsor of the event, said O'Connor's participation came about because of their friendship and her love of fly fishing. 

Guido Rahr, the center's president, said his group hasn't taken a position on the mine and that the speakers were careful to "make sure we were respecting the location" of the reception at the court. 

Rahr said participants mainly "ate yummy salmon treats" and looked at National Geographic photos of the bay. 

But one speaker was a former Alaska state Senate president, Rick Halford, who told reporters the next day that the proposal was a "very, very dangerous kind of mine." 

Supporters of the project made their own visit to Washington a couple of weeks earlier. They were not received at the high court. 

Hellman, the Pittsburgh ethics expert, said he finds the court reception particularly troubling because "we're talking about political activity. It's a lobbying effort and she is lending her considerable prestige to that effort." 

Another ethics professor, Stephen Gillers of New York University, said that if the speeches were not about advocacy, then the event itself probably does not pose an ethical problem for O'Connor. On the other hand, Gillers said it is possible O'Connor would have to step aside from any appellate case involving the groups that sponsored the reception. 

The court hosts 50 to 60 after-hours events a year, many related to the court. Guidelines for use of the building forbid partisan political activity and fundraising, and require a justice to sponsor an event. A cash bar and dancing are not permitted. 

Supreme Court justices are not covered by the ethics rules that apply to all federal judges. Still, justices generally adhere to those rules, Hellman said. 

O'Connor's involvement in last year's ballot issues in Iowa and Nevada also drew a rare rebuke from another federal judge. 

Senior Judge Laurence Silberman of the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., said "the issue of whether state court judges should be chosen or ratified by election or solely by appointment is a political issue on which serving federal judges should not publicly advocate, one way or the other." 

Silberman said that unlike the criticism of Scalia and Thomas, which he termed phony issues, O'Connor's advocacy "is a real ethical issue." 

O'Connor took part in a conference in Des Moines, Iowa, in September on the topic of judicial elections. That appearance came during a contentious campaign about whether voters should retain three Iowa Supreme Court justices who were part of a unanimous court ruling in favor of gay marriage. 

Federal judges in Iowa had been invited to attend by the Iowa State Bar Association, according to Chief Judge Robert Pratt of the Southern District of Iowa 

But Pratt wondered whether their attendance would be improper. 

Lacking the time for a formal opinion from the judiciary's ethics committee, the judge took advantage of a less formal process and called an ethics committee member for his views. 

Pratt said the committee member, U.S. District Judge Richard Kopf, informally advised the judges to stay away. 

They did, but O'Connor attended and said voters shouldn't punish judges when they disagree with their decisions. In the end, the three justices were ousted.

Print Email Share Comments Recommend Tweet View ArticleLeave a CommentSort: NewestSort: Oldest Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus. You must login to comment.

View Article

View All Comments

Latest Politics VideosMore »

View the Original article

Critics fault retired Justice O'Connor over ethics

By Mary Altaffer, AP

Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor speaks at a law school in New York last April.

EnlargeCloseBy Mary Altaffer, AP

Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor speaks at a law school in New York last April.

O'Connor, 81, was forced to apologize for 50,000 recorded telephone calls made to Nevada voters in which she supported a ballot measure to change the way state judges are selected. O'Connor said she did not authorize the calls featuring her recorded voice, much less their post-midnight delivery. But she also defended her involvement in the campaign that included her appearance in a television commercial.

In September, federal judges in Iowa stayed away from a conference on judicial elections at which O'Connor spoke in the midst of another campaign over ballot issues. The judges had received an informal opinion that their presence would violate the judiciary's ethics code.

Most recently, O'Connor hosted an after-hours reception at the court that was billed as a celebration of Bristol Bay in Alaska. But the featured speakers, other than O'Connor, were opponents of a proposed Alaskan copper and gold mine. They were in Washington to lobby lawmakers and regulators against the proposed Pebble Mine.

Arthur Hellman, an ethics expert at the University of Pittsburgh law school, said O'Connor should consider stopping her participation in court cases if she "wants to engage in this level of political or politically related activity."

Partisan-tinged questioning of conduct by high court justices has grown.

Liberal interest groups have faulted Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas for speaking at a private dinner hosted by Charles Koch, one of two energy-company-owning brothers who, liberal groups say, have too much sway on policymakers.

Some liberals have called on Thomas to sit out the expected high court fight over the health care law because of his wife's public criticism of the law. Some conservatives say Justice Elena Kagan should not take part in the health care case because of her work in the Obama administration before joining the court.

O'Connor has traveled the country since her retirement in 2006 to criticize costly election campaigns for state judges, promote enhanced civics education for schoolchildren and advocate for Alzheimer's research. Her husband, John, died in 2009 of complications from Alzheimer's disease.

Her primary focus has been on judicial independence, which she believes is harmed by electing judges.

At the same time, she has heard cases on appeal since her retirement. It is not uncommon for retired justices to sit with federal appeals courts from time to time. Justice David Souter, who left the court in 2009, has heard cases with the Boston-based court.

Through the end of March, O'Connor had written two appellate decisions and joined the majority in a half-dozen others this year. None of the cases involved judicial elections or the fate of the Alaska bay.

The continuing judicial work allows O'Connor, who earns $213,900, to receive salary increases that are tied to inflation. Judges who stop hearing cases receive a pension equal to their final annual salary as a full-time judge, but are excluded from subsequent cost-of-living increases.

Last week, O'Connor was the host of a Supreme Court reception "to celebrate the economic, cultural and ecological values of Alaska's Bristol Bay Watershed."

Opponents of the proposed huge mine near the bay fear it will devastate the world's largest wild sockeye salmon fishery. The Environmental Protection Agency recently said it would study potential effects from the mine. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson attended and briefly spoke at the reception.

O'Connor declined to answer questions for this story. But the head of the Wild Salmon Center, lead sponsor of the event, said O'Connor's participation came about because of their friendship and her love of fly fishing.

Guido Rahr, the center's president, said his group hasn't taken a position on the mine and that the speakers were careful to "make sure we were respecting the location" of the reception at the court.

Rahr said participants mainly "ate yummy salmon treats" and looked at National Geographic photos of the bay.

But one speaker was a former Alaska state Senate president, Rick Halford, who told reporters the next day that the proposal was a "very, very dangerous kind of mine."

Supporters of the project made their own visit to Washington a couple of weeks earlier. They were not received at the high court.

Hellman, the Pittsburgh ethics expert, said he finds the court reception particularly troubling because "we're talking about political activity. It's a lobbying effort and she is lending her considerable prestige to that effort."

Another ethics professor, Stephen Gillers of New York University, said that if the speeches were not about advocacy, then the event itself probably does not pose an ethical problem for O'Connor. On the other hand, Gillers said it is possible O'Connor would have to step aside from any appellate case involving the groups that sponsored the reception.

The court hosts 50 to 60 after-hours events a year, many related to the court. Guidelines for use of the building forbid partisan political activity and fundraising, and require a justice to sponsor an event. A cash bar and dancing are not permitted.

Supreme Court justices are not covered by the ethics rules that apply to all federal judges. Still, justices generally adhere to those rules, Hellman said.

O'Connor's involvement in last year's ballot issues in Iowa and Nevada also drew a rare rebuke from another federal judge.

Senior Judge Laurence Silberman of the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., said "the issue of whether state court judges should be chosen or ratified by election or solely by appointment is a political issue on which serving federal judges should not publicly advocate, one way or the other."

Silberman said that unlike the criticism of Scalia and Thomas, which he termed phony issues, O'Connor's advocacy "is a real ethical issue."

O'Connor took part in a conference in Des Moines, in September on the topic of judicial elections. That appearance came during a contentious campaign about whether voters should retain three Iowa Supreme Court justices who were part of a unanimous court ruling in favor of gay marriage.

Federal judges in Iowa had been invited to attend by the Iowa State Bar Association, according to Chief Judge Robert Pratt of the Southern District of Iowa

But Pratt wondered whether their attendance would be improper.

Lacking the time for a formal opinion from the judiciary's ethics committee, the judge took advantage of a less formal process and called an ethics committee member for his views.

Pratt said the committee member, U.S. District Judge Richard Kopf, informally advised the judges to stay away.

They did, but O'Connor attended and said voters shouldn't punish judges when they disagree with their decisions. In the end, the three justices were ousted.

Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters

View the Original article