Mr. President, the events of the last few days in Zimbabwe are outrageous and warrant universal condemnation. It is time for the government of Robert Mugabe to cease its repressive and divisive actions, and to allow Zimbabweans to pursue their hopes for legitimate political change and opportunity.

Since Sunday, the world has watched with horror and outrage as the Mugabe government has cracked down on legitimate opposition, detained fifty Zimbabweans attending a peaceful prayer meeting outside of Harare, and brutalized opposition leaders and ordinary citizens alike.

A protestor was shot and killed. Morgan Tsvangirai, the leader of the Movement for Democratic Change, has been badly beaten and suffered severe head injuries. Lovemore Madhuku, the leader of the National Constitutional Assembly, reportedly has a broken arm and numerous other wounds. Many of their colleagues in opposition remain in Harare hospitals.

The government has responded to the outrage prompted by these attacks on human rights and legitimate expression with characteristic bluster. Once again, we are told that the opposition is to blame. Once again, we hear ominous warnings that the opposition is "set to pay a very heavy price, regardless of who they are." Meanwhile, the true cause of the strife – President Mugabe's disastrous rule – remains unaddressed. To the dismay even of his own party, he has declared his intention to run for a new term in office in 2008.

Mr. President, these events are shocking, but sadly they do not come as a surprise. For years, it has been increasingly apparent that the Mugabe government is interested only in its own survival and enrichment, not the welfare of the people of Zimbabwe. International observers – including the United States – concluded that the presidential election of 2002 and the parliamentary elections of 2005 were not free and fair.

The State Department reported just last week in its country report on human rights in Zimbabwe that: "The government engaged in the pervasive and systematic abuse of human rights. The ruling party's dominant control and manipulation of the political process through intimidation and corruption effectively negated the right of citizens to change their government."

Meanwhile, the government's corruption and mismanagement has brought the Zimbabwean economy to the brink of ruin. Estimates place inflation at a world-high of 1,700 percent, and the IMF forecasts that this could pass 4,000 percent by the end of the year. Unemployment stands at 80 percent. Poverty rates are soaring. Zimbabwe's economy is shrinking faster than any other country in the world that is not at war.

I am heartened, though, that this political and economic deterioration has been met with growing calls for change.

Within Zimbabwe, the opposition to Mugabe is showing resilience and courage. Factions of Mugabe's own party have indicated that they want a transition in 2008, and ordinary citizens are increasingly voicing their hopes for a new chapter.

Beyond Zimbabwe, frustration with the Mugabe government is mounting. The head of the African Union has expressed his embarrassment at the situation in Zimbabwe. South Africa and the Southern African Development Community, which have been slow to criticize Zimbabwe in the past, seem to be losing patience. The United States, European Union, and the United Nations were swift in condemning this latest outrage, and have been consistent in their calls for change.

Mr. President, the United States must continue to stand strongly against the Mugabe government's abuses of power in Zimbabwe. We must join with our European allies, the United Nations, and – most importantly – the countries and institutions of the region to press for positive change in Zimbabwe. That means a peaceful democratic transition in 2008, and support for economic growth and opportunity – including the lifting of sanctions – once the dark cloud of Mugabe's rule is lifted, and Zimbabweans are able again to reach for the new horizon they deserve.

I call on President Mugabe to immediately release all political detainees and repeal the ban on political rallies, to end the use of violence and torture in the jails, permit a free media and abide by the rule of law. His government must also urgently address the humanitarian crisis that has put the mass of his population in dire need of assistance.

Zimbabwe is a nation rich in history and rich in resources. Its talented people have known great hardship just as they have achieved great heights. When Robert Mugabe became president over a quarter century ago, there was great hope. Zimbabwe had emerged from British rule, claiming its freedom and its future for itself.

Sadly, the freedom and opportunity for which Zimbabweans fought have been eclipsed in the last decade by repression and uncertainty. Instead of peaceful self-determination, we see Zimbabweans intimidated and beaten in the streets. Instead of the responsible management of Zimbabwe's state institutions, we see state-sanctioned corruption, violence and property seizures. Instead of economic self-sufficiency, we see what was once one of Africa's most promising economies in a free-fall.

Yet I am confident that the people of Zimbabwe will once again claim for themselves a better future. As they seek to hold their leaders accountable, as they try to rebuild their lives and their country, they must know that they have a strong and steady friend in the United States. The events of the last few days – and the Mugabe regime – must belong to the past, and the United States must work with the international community to help all Zimbabweans forge a better future.

On Thursdays, Senator Durbin and I hold a constituent coffee so we can hear from the folks back home. A young man came a few months ago who was about 25, 26 years old. He had been back from Iraq for a year. The first months of that year he spent in a coma. An explosion had shattered his face, blinded him in both eyes, and has left him without the use of one arm.

He told us about how he was going through rehab, and he introduced us to his family. He has a wife and two young daughters like I do, and his wife talked for a bit about the adjustments they were making at home since dad got hurt. And I found myself looking at not just him, but at his wife, who loves him so much, and I thought about how their lives were forever changed because of the decision that was carried out four years ago.

The sacrifices of war are immeasurable.

I first made this point in the fall of 2002, at the end of the speech I gave opposing the invasion of Iraq. I said then that I certainly do not oppose all wars, but dumb wars – rash wars. Because there is no decision more profound than the one we make to send our brave men and women into harm's way.

I've thought about these words from time to time since that speech, but never so much as the day I saw that young man and his wife.

The sacrifices of war are immeasurable. Too many have returned from Iraq with that soldier's story – with broken bodies and shattered nerves and wounds that even the best care may not heal. Too many of our best have come home shrouded in the flag they loved. Too many moms and dads and husbands and wives have answered that knock on the door that's the hardest for any loved one to hear.

And the rest of us have seen too many promises of swift victories, and dying insurgencies, and budding democracy give way to the reality of a brutal civil war that goes on and on and on to this day.

The sacrifices of war are immeasurable. It was not impossible to see back then that we might arrive at the place we're at today.

I said then that a war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics would lead to a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I believed that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale or strong international support would only strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda and erode the good standing and moral authority that took our country generations to build. There were other experts, and leaders, and everyday Americans who believed this too.

I wish we had been wrong. I wish we weren't here talking about this at the beginning of the war's fifth year. Because the consequences of this war have been profound. And the sacrifices have been immeasurable.

Those who would have us continue this war in perpetuity like to say that this is a matter of resolve on behalf of the American people. But the American people have been extraordinarily resolved. They have seen their sons and daughters killed or wounded on the streets of Fallujah. They have spent hundreds of billions of dollars on this effort – money that could have been devoted to strengthening our homeland security and our competitive standing as a nation.

No, it has not been a failure of resolve that has led us to this chaos, but a failure of strategy – a strategy that has only strengthened Iran's strategic position; increased threats posed by terrorist organizations; reduced U.S. credibility and influence around the world; and placed Israel and other nations friendly to the United States in the region in greater peril.

Iraq has not been a failure of resolve, it has been a failure of strategy – and that strategy must change. It is time bring a responsible end to this conflict is now.

There is no military solution to this war. No amount of U.S. soldiers – not 10,000 more, not 20,000 more, not the almost 30,000 more that we now know we are sending– can solve the grievances that lay at the heart of someone else's civil war. Our troops cannot serve as their diplomats, and we can no longer referee their civil war. We must begin a phased withdrawal of our forces starting May 1st, with the goal of removing all combat forces by March 30th, 2008.

We also must make sure that we're not as careless getting out of this war as we were getting in, and that's why this withdrawal should be gradual, and keep some U.S. troops in the region to prevent a wider war and go after Al Qaeda and other terrorists.

But it must begin soon. Letting the Iraqis know that we will not be there forever is our last, best hope to pressure the Iraqis to take ownership of their country and bring an end to their conflict. It is time for our troops to start coming home.

History will not judge the architects of this war kindly. But the books have yet to be written on our efforts to right the wrongs we see in Iraq. The story has yet to be told about how we turned from this moment, found our way out of the desert, and took to heart the lessons of war that too many refused to heed back then.

For it is of little use or comfort to recall past advice and warnings if we do not allow them to guide us in the challenges that lie ahead. Threats loom large in an age where terrorist networks thrive, and there will certainly be times when we have to call on our brave servicemen and women to risk their lives again.

But before we make that most profound of all decisions – before we send our best off to battle, we must remember what led us to this day and learn from the principles that follow.

We must remember that ideology is not a foreign policy. We must not embark on war based on untested theories, political agendas or wishful thinking that has little basis in fact or reality. We must focus our efforts on the threats we know exist, and we must evaluate those threats with sound intelligence that is never manipulated for political reasons again.

We must remember that the cost of going it alone is immense. It is a choice we sometimes have to make, but one that must be made rarely and always reluctantly. That is because America's standing in the world is a precious resource not easily rebuilt. We value the cooperation and goodwill of other nations not because it makes us feel good, but because it makes all the world safer – because the only way to battle 21st century threats that race across borders – threats like terror, and disease, and nuclear proliferation – is to enlist the resources and support of all nations. To win our wider struggle, we must let people across this planet know that there is another, more hopeful alternative to the hateful ideologies the terrorists espouse – and a renewed America will reflect and champion that vision.

We must remember that planning for peace is just as critical as planning for war. Iraq was not just a failure of conception, but a failure of execution, and so when a conflict does arise that requires our involvement, we must do our best to understand that country's history, its politics, its ethnic and religious divisions before our troops ever set foot on its soil.

We must understand that setting up ballot boxes does not a democracy make – that real freedom and real stability come from doing the hard work of helping to build a strong police force, and a legitimate government, and ensuring that people have food, and water, and electricity, and basic services. And we must be honest about how much of that we can do ourselves and how much must come from the people themselves.

Finally, we must remember that when we send our servicemen and women to war, we make sure we've given them the training they need, and the equipment that will keep them safe, and a mission they can accomplish.

We must respect our commanders' advice not just when it's politically convenient, but even when it's not what we want to hear. And when our troops come home, it is our most solemn responsibility to make sure they come home to the services, and the benefits, and the care they deserve.

As we stand at the beginning of the fifth year of this war, let us remember that young man from Illinois, and his wife, and his daughters, and the thousands upon thousands of families who are living the very real consequences and immeasurable sacrifices that have come from our decision to invade Iraq.

We are so blessed in this country to have so many men and women like this – Americans willing to put on that uniform, and say the hard goodbyes, and risk their lives in a far off land because they know that such consequences and sacrifices are sometimes necessary to defend our country and achieve a lasting peace.

That is why we have no greater responsibility than to ensure that the decision to place them in harm's way is the right one. And that is why we must learn the lessons of Iraq. It is what we owe our soldiers. It is what we owe their families. And it is what we owe our country – now, and in all the days and months to come. Thank you.

Senator Barack Obama wants to know what's important in our community. So the freshman Senator hosted a town hall meeting Saturday at Rock Valley College.

"We should begin a phased withdrawal and we should begin this year," Obama says.

Condemning the war in Iraq was the highlight of this town hall meeting. Senator Barack Obama says the war has become less about the military and more about the game of politics.

"The President needs to step back and have a sober common sense strategy to bring our troops home stabilize the situation and refocus our attention on the real war which is the War on Terror," he says.

The Senator also answered audience questions regarding healthcare, welfare and how to become less dependent on foreign oil.

Some didn't have any questions at all. They just sat in awe and were star struck.

"It was amazing. He's so inspiring and everyone loves him. It's just an incredible energy" says Rockford resident Erin Hoople.

Even past opponents speak highly about Obama. General John Borling ran against Obama in the 2004 Primary Election.

"He's trying hard even outside the structure of party. I think in the past main parties let us down cause I like guys who have enough standing that can speak their mind and do the things we need," General Borling says.

And many are looking to Obama to run for higher office.

"I think he's a wonderful man. and I hope he does run for President of the United States," says Rockford resident Ann Cahill.

But when asked about Oprah Winfrey urging him to run for President he says, "Oprah was trying to distract from people calling her to run for President."

The Senator has been consistent in saying he's not planning on running for President and just wants to focus on his work in the Senate.

Thursday, September 28, 2006

Statement for the Record

Mr. President, I am proud to be sponsoring this amendment with the senior senator from West Virginia. He's absolutely right that Congress has abrogated its oversight responsibilities, and one way to reverse that troubling trend is to adopt a sunset provision in this bill. We did that in the Patriot Act, and that allowed us to make important revisions to the bill that reflected our experience about what worked and didn't work during the previous 5 years. We should do that again with this important piece of legislation.

But I want to take a few minutes to speak more broadly about the bill before us.

I may have only been in this body for a short while, but I am not naive to the political considerations that go along with many of the decisions we make here. I realize that soon, we will adjourn for the fall, and the campaigning will begin in earnest. And there will be 30-second attack ads and negative mail pieces, and we will be criticized as caring more about the rights of terrorists than the protection of Americans. And I know that the vote before us was specifically designed and timed to add more fuel to that fire.

And yet, while I know all of this, I'm still disappointed. Because what we're doing here today - a debate over the fundamental human rights of the accused - should be bigger than politics. This is serious.

If this was a debate with obvious ideological differences - heartfelt convictions that couldn't be settled by compromise - I would understand. But it's not.

All of us - Democrats and Republicans - want to do whatever it takes to track down terrorists and bring them to justice as swiftly as possible. All of us want to give our President every tool necessary to do this. And all of us were willing to do that in this bill. Anyone who says otherwise is lying to the American people.

In the five years that the President's system of military tribunals has existed, not one terrorist has been tried. Not one has been convicted. And in the end, the Supreme Court of the United found the whole thing unconstitutional, which is why we're here today.

We could have fixed all of this in a way that allows us to detain and interrogate and try suspected terrorists while still protecting the accidentally accused from spending their lives locked away in Guantanamo Bay. Easily. This was not an either-or question.

Instead of allowing this President - or any President - to decide what does and does not constitute torture, we could have left the definition up to our own laws and to the Geneva Conventions, as we would have if we passed the bill that the Armed Services committee originally offered.

Instead of detainees arriving at Guantanamo and facing a Combatant Status Review Tribunal that allows them no real chance to prove their innocence with evidence or a lawyer, we could have developed a real military system of justice that would sort out the suspected terrorists from the accidentally accused.

And instead of not just suspending, but eliminating, the right of habeas corpus - the seven century-old right of individuals to challenge the terms of their own detention, we could have given the accused one chance - one single chance - to ask the government why they are being held and what they are being charged with.

But politics won today. Politics won. The Administration got its vote, and now it will have its victory lap, and now they will be able to go out on the campaign trail and tell the American people that they were the ones who were tough on the terrorists.

And yet, we have a bill that gives the terrorist mastermind of 9/11 his day in court, but not the innocent people we may have accidentally rounded up and mistaken for terrorists - people who may stay in prison for the rest of their lives.

And yet, we have a report authored by sixteen of our own government's intelligence agencies, a previous draft of which described, and I quote, "...actions by the United States government that were determined to have stoked the jihad movement, like the indefinite detention of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay..."

And yet, we have Al Qaeda and the Taliban regrouping in Afghanistan while we look the other way. We have a war in Iraq that our own government's intelligence says is serving as Al Qaeda's best recruitment tool. And we have recommendations from the bipartisan 9/11 commission that we still refuse to implement five years after the fact.

The problem with this bill is not that it's too tough on terrorists. The problem with this bill is that it's sloppy. And the reason it's sloppy is because we rushed it to serve political purposes instead of taking the time to do the job right.

I've heard, for example, the argument that it should be military courts, and not federal judges, who should make decisions on these detainees. I actually agree with that. The problem is that the structure of the military proceedings has been poorly thought through. Indeed, the regulations that are supposed to be governing administrative hearings for these detainees, which should have been issued months ago, still haven't been issued. Instead, we have rushed through a bill that stands a good chance of being challenged once again in the Supreme Court.

This is not how a serious Administration would approach the problem of terrorism. I know the President came here today and was insisting that this is supposed to be our primary concern. He's absolutely right it should be our primary concern - which is why we should be approaching this with a somberness and seriousness that this Administration has not displayed with this legislation.

Now, let me be clear - for those who plot terror against the United States, I hope God has mercy on their soul, because I certainly do not. And for those who our government suspects of terror, I support whatever tools are necessary to try them and uncover their plot.

But we also know that some have been detained who have no connection to terror whatsoever. We've already had reports from the CIA and various generals over the last few years saying that many of the detainees at Guantanamo shouldn't have been there - as one U.S. commander of Guantanamo told the Wall Street Journal, "Sometimes, we just didn't get the right folks." And we all know about the recent case of the Canadian man who was suspected of terrorist connections, detained in New York, sent to Syria, and tortured, only to find out later that it was all a case of mistaken identity and poor information.

In the future, people like this may never have a chance to prove their innocence. They may remain locked away forever.

And the sad part about all of this is that this betrayal of American values is unnecessary. We could've drafted a bipartisan, well-structured bill that provided adequate due process through the military courts, had an effective review process that would've prevented frivolous lawsuits being filed and kept lawyers from clogging our courts, but upheld the basic ideals that have made this country great.

Instead, what we have is a flawed document that in fact betrays the best instincts of some of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle - those who worked in a bipartisan fashion in the Armed Services Committee to craft a bill that we could have been proud of. And they essentially got steamrolled by this Administration and by the imperatives of November 7th.

That is not how we should be doing business in the U.S. Senate, and that's not how we should be prosecuting this war on terrorism. When we're sloppy and cut corners, we are undermining those very virtues of America that will lead us to success in winning this war. At bare minimum, I hope we can at least pass this provision so that cooler heads can prevail after the silly season of politics is over. Thank you.

Thursday, February 16, 2006

Mr. President, four years ago, following one of the most devastating attacks in our nation's history, Congress passed the USA PATRIOT Act to give our nation's law enforcement the tools they needed to track down terrorists who plot and lurk within our own borders and all over the world - terrorists who, right now, are looking to exploit weaknesses in our laws and our security to carry out even deadlier attacks than we saw on September 11th.

We all agreed that we needed legislation to make it harder for suspected terrorists to go undetected in this country. Americans everywhere wanted that.

But soon after the PATRIOT Act passed, a few years before I ever arrived in the Senate, I began hearing concerns from people of every background and political leaning that this law didn't just provide law enforcement the powers it needed to keep us safe, but powers it didn't need to invade our privacy without cause or suspicion.

Now, at times this issue has tended to degenerate into an "either-or" type of debate. Either we protect our people from terror or we protect our most cherished principles. But that is a false choice. It asks too little of us and assumes too little about America.

Fortunately, last year, the Senate recognized that this was a false choice. We put patriotism before partisanship and engaged in a real, open, and substantive debate about how to fix the PATRIOT Act. And Republicans and Democrats came together to propose sensible improvements to the Act. Unfortunately, the House was resistant to these changes, and that's why we're voting on the compromise before us.

Let me be clear: this compromise is not as good as the Senate version of the bill, nor is it as good as the SAFE Act that I have cosponsored. I suspect the vast majority of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle feel the same way. But, it's still better than what the House originally proposed.

This compromise does modestly improve the PATRIOT Act by strengthening civil liberties protections without sacrificing the tools that law enforcement needs to keep us safe. In this compromise:

• We strengthened judicial review of both National Security Letters, the administrative subpoenas used by the FBI, and Section 215 orders, which can be used to obtain medical, financial and other personal records.
• We established hard time limits on sneak-and-peak searches and limits on roving wiretaps.
• We protected most libraries from being subject to National Security Letters.
• We preserved an individual's right to seek counsel and hire an attorney without fearing the FBI's wrath.
• And we allowed judicial review of the gag orders that accompany Section 215 searches.

The compromise is far from perfect. I would have liked to see stronger judicial review of National Security Letters and shorter time limits on sneak and peak searches, among other things.

Sen. Feingold has proposed several sensible amendments - that I support - to address these issues. Unfortunately, the Majority Leader is preventing Sen. Feingold from offering these amendments through procedural tactics. That is regrettable because it flies in the face of the bipartisan cooperation that allowed the Senate to pass unanimously its version of the Patriot Act - a version that balanced security and civil liberties, partisanship and patriotism.

The Majority Leader's tactics are even more troubling because we will need to work on a bipartisan basis to address national security challenges in the weeks and months to come. In particular, members on both sides of the aisle will need to take a careful look at President Bush's use of warrantless wiretaps and determine the right balance between protecting our security and safeguarding our civil liberties. This is a complex issue. But only by working together and avoiding election-year politicking will we be able to give our government the necessary tools to wage the war on terror without sacrificing the rule of law.

So, I will be supporting the Patriot Act compromise. But I urge my colleagues to continue working on ways to improve the civil liberties protections in the Patriot Act after it is reauthorized.

I thank the chair and yield the floor.

Throughout his political career, Barack Obama has been a leader in fighting for open and honest government. During his first year as an Illinois State Senator, he helped lead the fight to pass Illinois' first ethics reform bill in 25 years. As a U.S. Senator, he has spearheaded the effort to clean up Washington in the wake of the Jack Abramoff scandal.

Senator Obama is one of the authors of the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act (S. 2180). The bill would lengthen the cooling off period to two years for lawmakers and staff who seek to become lobbyists, and it would require immediate disclosure as soon as any job negotiations begin. The bill would open conference committee meetings to the public and require that all bills be posted on the Internet for 24 hours before they can be voted on by the Senate. Finally, the bill would end all lobbyist-funded gifts, meals, and travel and strengthen the Senate office that monitors lobbyist disclosure forms.

In addition, Senator Obama has sponsored three other ethics-related bills:

• The Congressional Ethics Enforcement Commission Act (S. 2259)

  The bill would create an outside ethics commission to receive complaints from the public on alleged ethics violations by members of Congress, staff, and lobbyists. The commission would have the authority to investigate complaints and present public findings of fact about possible violations to the House and Senate Ethics Committee and Justice Department. By taking the initial fact finding out of the hands of members of Congress, who are often reluctant to investigate their colleagues, the bill ensures prompt and fair disposition of public complaints.

  To avoid manipulation of the commission for political purposes, any person filing a complaint that they knew to be false would be subject to a fine and/or imprisonment. No complaints could be filed against a member of Congress for 30 days before a primary election and 60 days before a general election.

  The bill has been widely endorsed by reform groups. According to Common Cause, "this legislation would do more to reform ethics and lobbying than any other piece of legislation introduced thus far because it goes to the heart of the problem: enforcement." Public Citizen praised Senator Obama "for having the courage to challenge the business-as-usual environment on Capitol Hill and introduce far-reaching legislation." Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington stated: "This is the first bill that deals seriously with the lack of oversight and enforcement in the existing congressional ethics process. . . . This bill will help restore Americans' confidence in the integrity of Congress.

• The Transparency and Integrity in Earmarks Act (S. 2261)

  The bill would shed light on the almost 16,000 earmarks that were included in spending bills in 2005. Under the bill, all earmarks, including the name of the requestor and a justification for the earmark, would have to be disclosed 72 hours before they could be considered by the full Senate. Senators would be prohibited from advocating for an earmark if they have a financial interest in the project or earmark recipient. And, earmark recipients would have to disclose to an Office of Public Integrity the amount that they have spent on registered lobbyists and the names of those lobbyists.

• The Curtailing Lobbyist Effectiveness through Advance Notification, Updates, and Posting Act (The CLEAN UP Act) (S. 2179)

  The bill aims to improve public access to information about all legislation, including conference reports and appropriations legislation, in particular after hurried, end-of-session negotiations. Conference committee meetings and deliberations would have to be open to the public or televised, and conference reports would have to identify changes made to the bill from the House and Senate versions. Finally, no bill could be considered by the full Senate unless the measure has been made available to all Senators and the general public on the Internet for at least 72 hours.

By William Neikirk - Chicago Tribune

WASHINGTON -- Teamed with Republican Sen. Tom Coburn, Sen. Barack Obama has scored the biggest legislative victory of his Senate career on a bill to establish federal searchable databases of all government contracts, loans, grants and special-interest spending commonly known as pork.

Coburn of Oklahoma and Obama (D-Ill.) overcame the secret opposition of two powerful Senate veterans, Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) and Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), partly because Internet bloggers on the left and right tracked down and disclosed that first Stevens and then Byrd had stealthily put holds on the bill.

Stevens, Byrd back away

Senators have the privilege of putting holds on legislation without their names being disclosed. Usually the leadership doesn't buck them. But, facing criticism in the blog world and in newspaper editorials, Stevens and Byrd--renowned for their ability to snare federal dollars for projects in their states--dropped their opposition.

The Senate approved the measure by unanimous consent Thursday night. The House has passed a similar bill that does not cover contracts. But late Friday, Obama's office announced that House sponsors had agreed to go along with the Senate-passed measure with some modifications. And so Obama, elected in 2004, likely can soon claim he has passed a law.

House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said he planned to schedule the compromise bill, largely tracking the Obama-Coburn measure, for a House vote next week.

Obama earlier succeeded in passing an amendment to an Iraqi spending bill to provide assistance to the Republic of Congo, but the database legislation has further reach, covering $1 trillion in federal spending, and wider consumer appeal.

Both senators also have co-sponsored an amendment that would require competitive bidding on Federal Emergency Management Agency contracts, ending the practice of non-bid contracts.

The victory for Obama and Coburn demonstrated the growing power of the Internet in influencing legislation. Their bill would make it easier for Americans to use computers to quickly discover how their money is being spent, and particularly who is benefiting most from the federal budget.

Brian Riedl, a budget expert for the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, said computer users could type in "Halliburton" and get a list of all contracts between the government and the oil services company once headed by Vice President Dick Cheney.

Similarly, he said, they could type in "Planned Parenthood" or "Sierra Club" and discover all federal financial dealings with such groups. Or they could type in a phrase for a broad category of spending, such as "highway spending."

"People are going to be stunned to see how much of our tax dollars are wasted," Riedl said, adding that over time the databases could be a powerful tool in controlling spending.

Although it doesn't directly crack down on earmarks by members of Congress, in which lawmakers attach local pork projects to large bills, it would allow the public to get complete lists of such projects with little effort. But the names of the sponsors of earmarks would not be disclosed. Obama has introduced legislation to do that.

Information on federal spending is widely available on the Web, but the Obama-Coburn bill would make it easier to search for and monitor spending.

"By helping to lift the veil of secrecy in Washington, this database will help make us better legislators, reporters better journalists and voters more active citizens," Obama said in a statement. "It's both unusual and encouraging to see interest groups and bloggers on the left and the right come together to achieve results."

An unlikely alliance?

The legislation also brought together an unlikely pair in Obama, who usually leans to the left on legislation, and Coburn, a physician who leans far to the right on many issues.

John Hart, Coburn's press secretary, said, "They have great rapport. It's surprising for people who make a lot of assumptions about partisan differences. Both have sincere motivations to hold government accountable."

In announcing an agreement on disclosure legislation, Boehner, House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) and Rep. Tom Davis (R-Va.), chairman of the House Government Reform Committee, said the government awards $300 billion in grants to 30,000 different organizations and a million contracts that exceed the $25,000 reporting threshold. There will be separate databases for contracts and grants, they said.

Rob Portman, director of the Office of Management and Budget, praised congressional efforts for databases his agency will set up. "American taxpayers benefit from having the necessary information to hold government accountable," he said.

Chicago Sun-Times

N'DJAMENA, Chad -- Sen. Barack Obama departed this capital city Sunday morning on an Army military aircraft to Frankfort, Germany, to catch a commercial flight back to the United States.

He leaves with a "great urgency" to pressure the United States and other players to force Sudan to accept a United Nations peacekeeping force in the Darfur region. Obama's last stop was at a refugee camp near the Chad-Sudan border where a total of 15,333 people who fled Janjaweed violence live.

Of those he talked to, they told him almost to a person that they want to return -- but cannot unless there are U.N. troops there to guarantee their safety.

After this major Africa swing -- Obama left Washington on Aug. 18 -- he revs up a heavy political schedule in advance of the November elections, stumping in Iowa on Sept. 17, a stop in the early presidential caucus state that fuels speculation about whether the White House is in his future.

Obama launches a national tour to promote his second book Oct. 17 in Chicago.

He reflected on his trip at the back of a plane Saturday, talking above the roar of the engines to the three print reporters who have been covering his trip.

Obama's next big international journey will be in 2007 -- he's looking at China, India and Indonesia, "where ironically I actually have more of a childhood than I do in Kenya."

Some excerpts from Obama's interview:

On the Sudan situation

He says the African Union peacekeepers are hampered. "The instability in Sudan is greater than I realized. I think that the lack of a clear mandate for the African Union is more debilitating than I realized and that effectively they are not able to provide any type of security function in these areas."

Need for action

"It appears that there is a possible significant offensive by the Sudan forces against rebel forces once the rainy season [is] over and that is obviously a concern.... My overarching sense is the great urgency to get a United Nations protective force on the ground. We can't wait."

U.S. effort in Darfur

"Better, but better is not good enough. [A protective force] is not going to happen without special effort on our part."

Highlights and insights

"The visit to Kisumu [which included a stop at his father's homestead] and actually the response when we took that AIDS test was fairly remarkable [Obama and wife Michelle took it publicly to reduce the stigma of testing] ... a small gesture that could actually save some lives."

"Coming here and seeing how isolated people are and really getting a sense I think in this region how ungoverned entire segments of the continent are."

"Trying to figure out how we can create structures that provide people with basic security, basic protection ... a huge problem and one that we are going to have to continue to grapple with, I think, for many years because it has a direct impact on our own security back home."

2 Nobel Peace Prize winners

Obama met former Anglican Archbishop Desmond Tutu and Kenyan environmentalist Wangari Maathai. "The fact that both appeared so cheerful and hopeful indicates there is something about when people serve; somehow it enriches them in all sorts of ways. They just seemed like happy, fulfilled people, even though they are not particularly wealthy."

Chicago Tribune Editorial

Being Barack Obama means having to dampen expectations at every turn--here and everywhere he goes. Before he was even sworn in to the Senate he got questions about a presidential run in 2008. The question keeps coming up. He keeps denying he will run.

That's a burden most politicians would love to share. Obama doesn't chafe under it; he mostly carries it lightly and well. He is humble and self-deprecating but always aware of his star power.

On his sojourn to Africa this month, Obama is using that celebrity to the best possible advantage. Throughout the trip, he has dampened expectations about what he and the U.S. can do to help the continent. But it is in Kenya, the land of his father, that Obama's message of self-reliance has been most powerful.

In a country ravaged by HIV/AIDS, where the stigma still stings and many suffer in silence, Obama and his wife showed up at a tiny mobile clinic in Kisumu to be tested. The message could not have been clearer for Kenyans. Know the enemy and you can defeat the enemy. You can help yourselves.

Then, in a nationally televised speech in Nairobi, Obama pointed the finger for Kenya's failure to thrive at another disease plaguing the nation--corruption.

Insidious corruption, Obama told Kenyans, jeopardizes Kenya's hard-won independence and freedom. With eloquence that approached his soaring speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, Obama said that freedom is "being threatened by the imperfections of man, the allure of power over principle, the temptation to put selfish good over the public good."

Obama acknowledged that corruption is hardly restricted to Kenya. "My own city of Chicago has been home to some of the most corrupt local politics in American history, from patronage machine to questionable elections," he said.

But Kenya ranked 144 out of 158 nations in a recent Transparency International survey of official corruption. Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki was elected four years ago on a promise to root out the corruption that exploded during the 24-year reign of his predecessor, Daniel arap Moi. Now Kibaki's government faces its own corruption allegations.

Obama called the fight against corruption one of the "great struggles of our time."

"In the end," he said, "if the people cannot trust the government to do the job for which it exists--to protect them and to promote their common welfare--all else is lost." Then looking at the crowd before him, Obama said, "You will decide if your leaders will be held accountable, or if you will look the other way."

That's a powerful message for Kenya. It's one the senator could repeat when he comes home.

Remarks of Senator Barack Obama

New Orleans, Louisiana

Good afternoon President Francis, the Board of Trustees, faculty, parents, family, friends, and the Class of 2006.

I want to start by thanking you all for allowing me to share in your miracle today. Over the past year there has been no shortage of doubts about whether this college would live to see another commencement - and doubts remain still about the future of this great city. But on this summer's day in New Orleans, less than one year after the worst storm in American history beat down your door, I look out at the largest class to ever graduate from this college and know that one thing is certain - Xavier University is back.

I have to say that I'm pretty humbled to be here. Each year there are hundreds of commencements in this country. All are hopeful, some are inspiring, and most of you probably won't even remember who your speaker was ten years from now. As a rule, they usually involve an old guy like me giving young folks like you advice about what to expect in the real world - advice about the challenges you'll face and the obstacles you'll have to overcome.

But this is different. In the last month, I have walked among New Orleans' battered homes and empty streets and scattered debris that prove armies aren't the only ones who can wage wars on cities. I have seen pictures of Xavier after the storm - the submerged classrooms and the shattered windows and the dorm rooms that were left with books sitting open on desks and clothes still unpacked on the bed. And I have heard the story of nearly 400 students and faculty who were trapped on campus in the days after Katrina - waiting on the roof to be rescued with a sign that simply read "Help Us."

And as I thought about all of this, it dawned on me that when it comes to giving advice about challenges and obstacles, it's you who could probably teach the rest of us a thing or two about what it takes to overcome.

I could give you a lecture on courage, but some of you know what it is to wait huddled in the dark without electricity or running water, wondering if a helicopter or boat will come for you before the gunshots get closer or the food runs out or the waters rise.

I could talk at length about perseverance, but this is a class that was forced to scatter to schools across the country at the beginning of your senior year, leaving everything you knew behind while you waited to find out if you could ever come back.

And I could go on and on about the importance of community - about what it means to care for each other - but this is a school where so many sacrificed so much in order to open your doors in January; a triumph that showed the rest of America that there are those who refuse to desert this city and its people no matter what.

Yours has been an education that cannot simply be measured in the tests you've taken or the diploma you're about to receive. For it has also been an education in humanity, brought about by a force of nature - a lesson in both our capacity for good and in the imperfections of man; in our ability to rise to great challenges and our tendency to sometimes fall short of our obligations to one another.

Some will take an entire lifetime to experience these lessons - others never will. But as some of Katrina's youngest survivors, you've had a front row seat.

So what does this mean for you?

Well, lessons can be just as easily unlearned as they are learned. Time may heal, but it can also cloud the memory and remove us further from that initial core of concern.

And so what this all means is that today and every day, you have a responsibility to remember what happened here in New Orleans. To make it a part of who you are. To let its lessons guide you as face your own challenges.

After all, Katrina may well be the most dramatic test you face in life, but it will by no means be the last. There will be quiet tests of character - the shoulder you lend a friend during their time of need; the way you raise your children; the care you give a loved one who's sick or dying; the integrity and honesty with which you carry yourself.

There will be powerful personal tests - the profession you choose, the legacy you leave, your ability to handle failure and disappointment.

And of course, there are the tests you will face as citizen - whether you use your voice to rage against injustice; whether you use your time to give back to your community; whether you use your passion to commit yourself to a cause larger than yourself.

In most of these tests, there are two different paths you can take.

One is easy. After graduating from a great school like Xavier, you'll pretty much be able to punch your own ticket - which means you can take your diploma, walk off this stage, leave this city, and go chasing after the big house and the large salary and the nice suits and all the other things that our money culture says you should buy.

You can live in neighborhoods with people who are exactly like yourself, and send your kids to the same schools, and narrow your concerns to what's going in your own little circle.

And when you turn on the TV or open the newspaper and hear about all the trouble in the world, there will be pundits and politicians who'll tell you that it's someone else's fault and someone else's problem to fix.

They'll tell you that the Americans who sleep in the streets and beg for food got there because they're all lazy or weak of spirit. That the immigrants who risk their lives to cross a desert have nothing to contribute to this country and no desire to embrace our ideals. That the inner-city children who are trapped in dilapidated schools can't learn and won't learn and so we should just give up on them entirely. That the innocent people being slaughtered and expelled from their homes in Darfur are somebody else's problem to take care of.

And when you hear all this, the easiest thing in the world will be to do nothing at all. To turn off the TV, put down the paper, and walk away from the stories about Iraq or poverty or violence or joblessness or hopelessness. To go about your busy lives - to remain detached; to remain indifferent; to remain safe.

But if you should ever think about taking this path, I ask you first to remember.

Remember witnessing the pain that neglect and indifference can cause - how entire neighborhoods in this city were left to drown because no one thought to make sure that every person had the means to escape. Remember what happens when responsibilities are ignored and bucks are passed - when the White House blames FEMA and FEMA blames the state of Louisiana and pretty soon no one's fixing the problem because everyone thought somebody else would. And whenever you're tempted to view the poor or the ill or the persecuted as "those people" - people in their own world with their own problems - remember always your neighbors in places like the 9th ward; men and women and children who, just like you, wanted desperately to escape to somewhere better.

And if you remember all of this - if you remember what happened here in New Orleans - if you allow it to change you forever - know that there is another path you can take.

This one is more difficult. It asks more of you. It asks you to leave here and not just pursue your own individual dreams, but to help perfect our collective dream as a nation. It asks you to realize there is more to life than being rich, thin, young, famous, safe, and entertained. It asks you to recognize that there are people out there who need you.

You know, there's a lot of talk in this country about the federal deficit. But I think we should talk more about our empathy deficit - the ability to put ourselves in someone else's shoes; to see the world through the eyes of those who are different from us - the child who's hungry, the steelworker who's been laid-off, the family who lost the entire life they built together when the storm came to town.

When you think like this - when you choose to broaden your ambit of concern and empathize with the plight of others, whether they are close friends or distant strangers - it becomes harder not to act; harder not to help.

For each of you, this desire to do for others and serve your communities will come even easier if you allow yourself to remember what you saw here in New Orleans.

Because aside from all the bad that came from Katrina - the failures and the neglect, the incompetence and the apathy - you were also witness to a good that many forgot was even possible.

You saw people from every corner of this country drop what they were doing, leave their homes, and come to New Orleans - Americans who didn't know a soul in the entire city who found their own piece of driftwood, built their own make-shift raft, and waded through the streets of this city, saving anyone they could.
You saw the doctors and the nurses who refused to leave their city and their patients even when they were told time and again by local officials that it was no longer safe - even when helicopters were waiting to take them away. Men and women who stayed to care for the sick and dying long after their medical equipment and electricity were gone.

And after the storm had passed, you saw a spirit of generosity that spanned an entire globe, with billions upon billions in donations coming from tiny, far-off nations like Qatar and Sri Lanka. Think about that. These are places a lot of folks couldn't even identify on a map. Sri Lanka was still recovering from the devastation caused by last year's Tsunami. And yet, they heard about our tragedy, and they gave.

Remember always this goodness. Remember always that while many in Washington and on all levels of government failed New Orleans, there were plenty of ordinary people who displayed extraordinary humanity during this city's hour of need.

In the years to come, return this favor to those who are forced to weather their own storms - be it the loss of a job or a slide into poverty; an unexpected illness or an unforeseen eviction. And in returning these favors, seek also to make this a nation of no more Katrinas. Make this a nation where we never again leave behind any American by ensuring that every American has a job that can support a family and health care in case they get sick and a good education for their child and a secure retirement they can count on. Make this a nation where we are never again caught unprepared to meet the challenges of our time - where we free ourselves from a dependence on oil and protect our cities from both forces of terror and nature.

Make this a nation that is worthy of the sacrifices of so many of its citizens, and in doing so, make real the observation made by a visitor to our country so many centuries ago: "America is great because Americans are good."

I ask you to take this second path - this harder path - not because you have an obligation to those who are less fortunate, although you do have that obligation. Not because you have a debt to all of those who helped you get to where you are, although you do have that debt.

I ask you to take it because you have an obligation to yourself. Because our individual salvation depends on our collective salvation. And because it's only when you hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you will realize your true potential.

It is said that faith is a belief in things not seen, and miracles, by their nature, are inexplicable gifts from God.

But sometimes, if we look hard enough at the moments we triumph against the greatest of odds, we can see His will at work in the people He loves.

It's now well-known in this community that when your President, Norman Francis, promised to re-open this school by January, he joked that his decision would be recorded by history as either "crazy and stupid" or "bold and visionary."

And when I heard that, I wondered where you find the courage to make such a crazy, visionary promise - and where you find the commitment to keep it.

And I thought, Norman Francis is someone who remembers - remembers where he came from, remembers the lessons he learned, remembers the opportunities he's had, and lives his life according to those memories.

Born in Lafayette before Civil Rights and Voting Rights were even a possibility, this is a man who was raised in poverty, earning extra money for his parents as a child by shining shoes. He studied hard through high school, put himself through Xavier by working long hours in the library, and became the first ever African American to be accepted into Loyola's Law School.

He graduated that law school and could've gone anywhere and made any amount of money - but Norman Francis wanted to help people learn because he remembered all the people who helped him.

And so he came back to Xavier, and he worked his way up through the ranks, and he became the first ever African-American president of this school at just thirty-six years old.

Since that day he has had many accolades and many chances to do whatever he wished with his life. He has been an advisor to four U.S. Presidents, served on a commission to the Vatican, and as President of the United Negro College Fund.

But through all of this, he decided to stay here in New Orleans, and build this university.

And so when Katrina tried to tear it down, you can understand why he refused to let that happen - why he put aside tending to the damage in his own house so that he could work on rebuilding this one - why he believed more than anything in his promise that these doors would open in January.

Norman Francis has helped make today's miracle because he has seen miracles at work in his own life. Now that you have seen one in yours, it's your turn to live a life committed to others, devoted to the impossible, and ever aware of the lessons you learned in New Orleans.

I've noticed that in the rebuilding effort throughout this city, one of the last things to come back, and yet the easiest to notice, is the greenery that makes any community seem alive. And as I saw a newly planted tree on my last trip here, I thought of a passage from the book of Job:

"There is hope for a tree if it be cut down that it will sprout again, and that its tender branch will not cease."

Katrina was not the end of the tough times for New Orleans, and you will continue to face your own tests and challenges in the years to come. But if someone were to ask me how the tree stands on this August day, I would tell them that the seeds have sprouted, the roots are strong, and I just saw more than 500 branches that are ready to grow again. Congratulations on your graduation.

Thank you.