The Honorable Barney Frank, distinguished member of Congress from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for over 25 years and currently chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, was the featured speaker. Board member Ted Mann, introduced the Congressman with a quote from former Rep. Michael Oxley, (R-OH), "It's people like Barney who make the system work!" He then described Mr. Frank as one of the fiercest wits and sharpest minds on Capitol Hill today.

Rep. Frank began his remarks with a declaration of support for the work of JSPAN, "an organization so important to continue." He urged those present "as Jews to resist the temptation to lapse into selfishness," and reminded everyone that the position of Jews in America has gotten much easier over the decades. In contrast, his own questioning in the 50's and 60's about whether or not to become involved in politics was because of his being Jewish, and not because he questioned whether a gay individual could be elected. Being gay, he noted, was a private issue, whereas he had been "outed" as a Jew at his Bar Mitzvah. Today, with dozens of Jews in the House and in the Senate, that issue is moot.

Rep. Frank was pleased to report that, contrary to some prognosticators, the Jewish community is still generally liberal in its political direction. It was widely accepted that the Republican wins in 2002 and 2004 were not a result of a pro-fundamentalist swing, but more likely the Republican strategy to capitalize on the security issue. The push to dismantle social security, the centerpiece of the New Deal of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, was a failure. Americans were not about to give up social security, a model of public policy, and the Republicans lost that debate.

Then, in April of 2005, the Terri Schiavo case hit the headlines. The Republicans assumed that the country would rally behind this issue. The Democratic leadership decided that it was a losing cause and should not be fought, but Democratic members of Congress, including Rep. Frank, joined the fight in the House. Americans were as angered by this case as they were by the Clinton impeachment hearings. As Rep. Frank explained, "The notion that Congress was debating this issue and that this was about to be decided on political grounds drove the average American wild." The Schiavo case brought home to Americans the difference between moral decisions made in privacy and political policy decided in public. Today, as Rep. Frank observed, there are practically no moderate Republicans in Congress and this makes the legislative work more difficult. The few that are in office are busy trying to save their seats.

Where funding issues are concerned, Rep. Frank stressed that there must be more open discussion in this country about the necessity for increased taxes. "Programs are a lot more popular than the taxes to pay for them. We have needs that can be met by what is in our pockets, but also those that can only be met by government." A need that demands government engagement is domestic health care, the most pressing issue in the United States today.

Rep. Frank touched briefly on the current situation in the Middle East. He commented that in hindsight, Yasser Arafat was one of the great betrayers of his people. As far as Israel is concerned, we should continue to encourage it to be receptive to any peace initiatives, but we must also defend it and praise it for the strengths of its open democracy. Finally, in assessing the situation in Iraq, Rep. Frank feels that the United States invasion of Iraq has resulted in empowering the radicals while undercutting the moderates. In addition, the invasion has now been acknowledged to have been bad for Israel, as well as making it increasingly difficult to defend Afghanistan because of the large number of troops that have been deployed in Iraq.

In appreciation for coming to Philadelphia to address Ted Mann presented Rep. Frank with an engraved bust of Benjamin Franklin. JSPAN members were urged to continue their support of the organization and to attend future programs.

The Constitutional system of checks and balances protect Americans from abuse of executive power only if the Congress exercises appropriate oversight. Congress cannot exercise such oversight if it allows the nation's senior law enforcement official to lie about his own actions or to cover up violations of law by others.

JSPAN’s letter cited two recent examples:

• In the case of the dismissed prosecutors, Gonzales’s fits of selective amnesia make it clear that he deliberately lied to Congress in a feeble attempt to mask a clear and unmistakable pattern of improper political influence with prosecutorial decision-making. A false claim not to remember is just as much a lie as a conscious misrepresentation of a fact one remembers well. Instances of phony forgetfulness seem to abound throughout Gonzales's testimony, but his claim to have no memory of the November Justice Department meeting at which he authorized the attorney firings after twice secretly delegating authority to political staffers leaves us gaping in incredulity.
• In February 2006, Gonzales told two Congressional panels that there had "not been any serious disagreement about the program" of warrantless wiretaps. We have since learned that his testimony was false. Former Deputy Attorney General James Comey told the Senate Judiciary Committee that he had refused to certify the legality of the eavesdropping program. Gonzales, then Counsel to the President, tried to go over Comey's head by rushing to the hospital and appealing directly to Attorney General John Ashcroft, who lay semi-conscious in an intensive care unit recovering from gall bladder surgery. Ashcroft rebuffed Gonzales according to Comey’s testimony. How can Gonzales claim with a straight face that there was no “serious disagreement” when the Solicitor General was personally rebuffed by the Attorney General and his deputy concerning a secret program allegedly essential to national security but of dubious constitutional validity?

To view JSPAN's letter to Congressman Barney Frank, click here.

In Elliott Dorff's and Louis Newman's anthology, Contemporary Jewish Ethics and Morality: A Reader, Richard J. Israel writes, "In the morning, if I can summon up the courage, I glance at the newspaper. I usually find it a deeply disturbing experience. First, I ask myself a question: Am I ever going to read another morning newspaper before the whole world goes up in smoke? Then I wonder if there is anything that I can do to help forestall doomsday. But I don't know what makes sense. I suppose I can make gut-level decisions without any greater difficulty than anyone else; but I don't want to speak or act out of private feelings alone: I want some guidance. One of the areas I want some guidance from is my Jewish tradition. What kind of resources are available to me as, in the words of Maurice Pekarsky, 'a human-being-born-Jew?' In what sense does my being a Jew give me help, direction, or purpose?"

Shavuot celebrates the giving of the Torah to our people. If as our tradition suggests, Torah is the guide for living for a Jew, then, by celebrating the holiday, we are celebrating the answer to Richard Israel's question. Yet, I suspect that turning to the five books of Moses for the guidance that Rabbi Israel seeks and accepting a literal translation of the text, with its many harsh and punitive verses, is not what he had in mind. Do we want to send plague upon plague against our enemies, including killing all their first born? I think not.

The Torah, if it is anything, is our constitution. Just as we would never think to seek guidance from the United States Constitution on the subject of slavery and women's disenfranchisement without reinterpreting those sections through a 21st Century lens, so should we look to the interpretive histories of the Torah for the kind of guidance that Rabbi Israel seeks.

On Shavuot we read the Ten Commandments. The very next verses describe the people's fear and awe as the mountain flames and the earth quakes. Moses then states enigmatically, "Be not afraid; for God has come only to test you. . ." Test you? What could that mean? And if, as our tradition suggests, the Torah is being given every day (Rashi's famous comment on Exodus 19:1), how are we being tested this Shavuot?

One answer is suggested by the great medieval sage Nahmanides, perhaps second only to Maimonides in the Jewish imagination. He examines the different ways that God tests us. Taking his cue from an ancient midrash, Nahmanides states that God tests the rich in order to see how they respond to the poor and impoverished. (Exodus Rabbah 31:2 attributed to Rabbi Abahhu).

When we Jews, who are among the most comfortable of people in this land of wealth and abundance, advocate on behalf of the poor and the vulnerable, then we are responding to the test of Sinai as understood by Nahmanides. In the process we also respond to Richard Israel's plea and so renew Torah in our time.

"Dear Senator:

Americans from all walks of life and all strata of our society recognize the need to overhaul our immigration laws. We urge you to work to overcome the legislative stalemate, and to support a comprehensive revamping of the program.

A satisfactory program of reform must provide greatly improved controls against illegal entry and, once that has been achieved, implement humanitarian goals of secure status for those already resident in the United States.

The members of our organization, the Jewish Social Policy Action Network, value our tradition of welcoming the stranger to our shores, and therefore are deeply concerned with the immigration policy of the United States and with our treatment of aliens within our borders. The full text of our immigration policy appears on our web site at www.JSPAN.org.

With national immigration law and practice still under vigorous debate, JSPAN will continue to speak out on the policy issues presented. As always, we welcome your comments on our letter and on pending immigration issues."

The issue of gun violence, as delineated by the PEA steering committee, "is complex and involves many factors, such as family splintering, lack of neighborhood safety, economic disadvantage, educational problems, mental illness, and political gridlock". PEA recognizes that these problems require ongoing and coordinated attention from a variety of resources in the community. The committee is convinced, however, that "through legislation designed to prevent easy purchase of large numbers of handguns, we can reduce illegal gun traffic and the outrageous number of guns in the streets of our communities... Legislators need to know that we care about the killing, that we support them in the enactment of this legislation, and that we expect them to take this first step in reducing the number of deaths from handguns in our area."

While the ready availability of handguns and other non-hunting firearms is a problem throughout the nation, the issue is compounded in Pennsylvania by the fact that this state has some of the least rigorous laws relating to the purchase of handguns. Currently, Pennsylvania allows the purchase of an unlimited number of guns every day of the month, not only for state residents but for anyone from surrounding states as well.

The One Hand Gun a Month proposal addresses this defect in Pennsylvania laws, and would, at a minimum, limit the number of hand guns on the street. It is important to note that while such a restriction would have a significant negative impact on "straw buyers", who can now purchase large quantities of guns legally for the sole purpose of resale to those with criminal records or to minors, it would in no way interfere with the desires of legitimate gun users.

IF YOU THINK the U.S. government is too generous to the poor, try surviving on the food stamp diet, as four members of Congress pledged to do this week. They have to feed themselves on $21 a week, or $3 a day, which is the average payout to food stamp recipients.

For most families on food stamps, that amount hasn't changed much since 1996, when Congress undertook a major welfare overhaul and added restrictions to the program aimed at cutting the number of people who could qualify. Because the key formula for computing food stamps for most families isn't indexed to inflation, the amount one can buy with them has been falling for the last decade.

Congress is now negotiating the 2007 farm bill, a five-year blueprint for the nation's agricultural supports that also includes the food stamp program. The pairing is a relic of the Depression era, when food stamps were created as a way of feeding the poor using American farmers' surplus crops. Though that's no longer the case, farm subsidies and food stamps still have one thing in common: Both are forms of food welfare. The difference is that while the poor and hungry are losing ground, wealthy agribusiness giants continue to hog their billions.

The average monthly household income of the 26 million Americans who receive food stamps is $648. Two of the members of Congress taking the food stamp challenge — Reps. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) and Jo Ann Emerson (R-Mo.) — have introduced a bill that would provide for small yearly increases in the payout and would revive benefits for some of the groups excluded in 1996. This would add about $4 billion a year to the $33-billion annual cost of the program. Such an increase could be offset by breaking the culture of dependence of a group that is genuinely getting fat off the government trough: farmers.

The U.S. spends about $20 billion annually on agricultural subsidies, the vast majority going to large commercial operations, not family farms. These payments distort trade, heighten poverty in the Third World and raise food prices for U.S. consumers. Continuing this porkfest while the neediest Americans go hungry is more than nonsensical — it's immoral.

To learn more:

• Washington Post: Pangs of Hunger -- and Bit of Guilt by Lyndsey Layton

June represents many things to all of us: the end of the school year, prospective vacations, baseball, planting the garden and other activities. But for the Pennsylvania General Assembly, it represents the time for hammering out the state’s budget for the coming fiscal year.

Since the Governor’s introduction of the budget in February, the Senate Appropriations Committee has signaled that it may be more interested in cutting education programs than ensuring that all students have the resource they need to succeed. And some members of the House Appropriations Committee may be more interested in expanding the Education Investment Tax Credit program than closing the equity gap among school districts.

Pennsylvania’s school districts simply can’t afford for the state to back away from public education. Despite the generous increases made to the public education budget over the past few years, this effort has primarily served to prevent further deterioration in state share. It has not remedied the fact that Pennsylvania ranks toward the bottom among states when it comes to state support for public education.

So, before you plan that vacation or plant your garden, please do your children and every child across the state the service of advocating for them by attending Public Education Advocacy Day at the Capitol on June 5, 2007! We need you to tell your legislators that we expect them to make public education a priority in the coming year’s budget, and further, that we expect them to use the results of the costing-out study due in November as the foundation for a sound school funding formula.

Please reserve June 5 for coming to Harrisburg. There will be an on-going briefing from 10:00 to 12:30 pm at Pine Street Presbyterian Church, located just across from the Capitol at 310 North Third Street, Harrisburg. There you will receive talking points as well as maps and room numbers for legislators. Then, join us for a rally in the Rotunda of the Capitol from 1-1:30, where we will raise our voices together to call for adequate funding for all of Pennsylvania’s children.

Check out Good Schools Pennsylvania for more information.

ZIAD J. ASALI, M.D. is the President and founder of the American Task Force on Palestine, a non-profit, non-partisan organization based in Washington, DC. Born and raised in Jerusalem, Dr. Asali is a sought-after voice on Middle East issues in both the media and on Capitol Hill, where he has testified before both chambers of Congress. READ ESSAY

SENATOR LINCOLN CHAFEE represented Rhode Island in the U.S. Senate for seven years. He is the former Chairman of the Middle East Subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. READ ESSAY