The Department of Justice today announced new rules for the Bureau of Prisons and other correctional agencies for addressing and preventing sexual abuse of inmates.

The Justice Department today released a proposed rule that aims to prevent and respond to sexual abuse in incarceration settings, in accordance with the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA). Based on recommendations of the National Prison Rape Elimination Commission (NPREC), the proposed rule contains four sets of national standards aimed at combating sexual abuse in four types of confinement facilities: adult prisons and jails, juvenile facilities, lockups and community confinement facilities.

A 60-day public comment period will follow publication in the Federal Register, after which the department will make revisions as warranted and the standards will be published as a final rule. The department expects the final rule will be published by the end of the year.

The standards will be immediately binding on the federal Bureau of Prisons upon publication. States that do not comply with the standards may lose five percent of the funds they would otherwise receive for prison purposes from DOJ.

There are separate standards for each of the four categories of facilities: [More...]

ABC reports that President Obama will propose a budget freeze and ban on earmarks in his State of the Union Address tonight. The theme of the speech ,“How We Win the Future”, stresses innovation, education and infrastructure. (Note: link is safe to click on, there's no automatic video that plays, hopefully ABC is learning.)

Is Obama going to discuss anything besides the economy tonight? I hope so. BTD - Conceptually, the President's proposal has a lot in common with the Tea Party Caucus's ideas. What seems clear is that no one seems willing to step on the Third Rail of touching Social Security and Medicare and thus "austerity" will fall on the rest of the budget for the time being.

Donald Rumsfeld is back. He's embarking on a round of media appearances to promote his new book, Known and Unknown, which reportedly is filled with something called "Rumsfeld's Rules."

[H]e says "Known and Unknown" will take on the most sensitive subjects, from the detainment facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to the mistreatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib in Iraq.

"I brought in people who were involved and outside advisers to discuss the legal decisions that were made. And in the book, I present them in a direct way," he says.

Here's a media event in D.C. that's taking invitations.

Politics is not a battle for the middle. It is a battle for defining the terms of the political debate. It is a battle to be able to say what is the middle. - What Obama Needs To Learn, 2006

Via Digby, Greg Sargent writes:

There's been a ton of commentary to the effect that Obama's planned State of the Union address, which will stress the need for leaner and smarter government in order to foster "competitiveness," signals a move by Obama to the "center." But judging from what we've heard so far, it seems more likely that Obama's speech will seek to redefine the "center" as something more in line with his own current policy approach and priorities.

Sure. The question then is is Obama's "own current policy approach" what progressives want? As I detail below, on tax policy it surely should not be. I'm not sure where Obama stands on much else. More . . .

Launching Wednesday: The Fearless Campaign

The Fearless Campaign is an effort launched from the halls of Congress to effectively coordinate fearless members of Congress with the passion of grassroots advocates to transform our country from the inside out. Through the Fearless Campaign we will revolutionize our nation's approach to six issues where special interests have blocked progress for too long: drug policy, education, food policy, immigration, internet freedom and LGBT equality.

The premise:

Being Fearless is never easy. It requires moral courage and a solid grassroots backing. But by connecting advocates at the grassroots level with those in Congress who are standing up for progress, the Fearless Campaign will move our country forward.

Sounds good to me. Who's behind it? Congressman Jared Polis (D-CO). Co-sponsors of tomorrow evening's launch event:[More...]

Kevin Drum writes:

The prosperity of the middle class obviously depends on a growing economy. But just as obviously, it depends on more than that. For liberalism to mean anything at all, we need to support policies that are aimed both at overall economic growth and at ensuring that prosperity is widely shared. We haven't done a very good job of that over the past 30 years.

30 years ago, Ronald Reagan was enacting tax policy that lowered the tax burden for the rich well raising it for the less well off (cutting income taxes and raising the FICA tax.) In 1993, Bill Clinton reversed this trend, and income inequality was lessened. Bush 43 cut taxes, especially for the rich, further exacerbating income inequality. More . . .

The critics hate Harry's Law but viewers are loving it. I like it. Far-fetched? Sure, but so was Ally McBeal and Boston Legal, two of David E. Kelley's other shows. The idea of combining a law office and a designer shoe store in the same space is unlikely to happen in real life, but it sure would be fun.

It's great to have a law show which showcases the human side of defendants and allows the lead character to pontificate against the war on drugs and over-incarceration. It's also very funny and Kathy Bates plays the role perfectly.

It's on tonight, after The Bachelor (you have to change channels though, otherwise you'll end up watching Castle, just another cop show.)

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

WaPo reporter Lori Montgomery:

President Obama has decided not to endorse his deficit commission's recommendation to raise the retirement age, and otherwise reduce Social Security benefits, in Tuesday's State of the Union address, cheering liberals and drawing a stark line between the White House and key Republicans in Congress.

Good decision.

Speaking for me only

I often remark on the utter lack of attention tax policy is given by the Beltway Dem wonks/pundits. Here is more fodder for that point - Chait, Yglesias and Klein. Yglesias is particularly striking:

Future public policy has to be about ways to maximize sustainable economic growth, and ways to maximize the efficiency with which services are delivered. [. . .] The future of American politics is really about how to square this circle. How to find the revenue in viable ways, and how to streamline these services to maximize value to citizens and minimize rent-seeking. Big government isn’t over, or going away. It’s utterly victorious and yet at its limits.

(Emphasis supplied.) I think this misunderstands the fundamental ideological struggle now ongoing. "Big government" is very much at risk, precisely because progressives have surrendered on the issue of tax policy. A government program is only as good as its funding. And in fact, determining whether a government program is good must take into account how it is funded. Currently, our tax structure is extremely anti-progressive. To me this is the biggest issue in politics. It is why I so condemn The Deal. For Beltway wonks, tax policy is not an issue. This attitude utterly amazes me.

Speaking for me only

Kevin Drum writes:

If, right now, you were to offer corporations and the rich a choice between (a) passage of EFCA or (b) a return to Clinton-era tax rates on high incomes, they wouldn't even blink. If you put a gun to their head and they had to choose between one or the other, they'd pay the higher taxes without a peep.

Lucky for corporations and the rich, they did not have to choose as the "most progressive Administration and Congress in a generation" did not pass EFCA and extended the Bush tax cuts for the rich.

Imagine that.

What's on your agenda today? I think everyone is having a better day than Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake, who is at Quantico with David House to deliver 42,000 signed petitions to Bradley Manning. They are being detained and their car has been searched, inventoried and now towed. Follow along on her Twitter feed. The latest:

In tow truck, waiting 2 b escorted off Quantico base. No idea how @DavidMHouse & I get back to DC.

Update: Here is statement of what happened.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

The former President of Mexico, Vicente Fox, tells Time Magazine he's changed his mind about the war on drugs, and now believes all drugs should be legalized.

"Prohibition didn't work in the Garden of Eden. Adam ate the apple," says Fox, 68, looking relaxed in a polo shirt — in contrast to his stressful last days in office. "We have to take all the production chain out of the hands of criminals and into the hands of producers — so there are farmers that produce marijuana and manufacturers that process it and distributors that distribute it and shops that sell it ... I don't want to say that legalizing means that drugs are good. They are not good but bad for your health, and you shouldn't take them. But ultimately, this responsibility is with citizens."

[More...]