Browsed by
Tag: Congress

Ducking Congressional Oversight – Again

Ducking Congressional Oversight – Again

Comments 2 comments

Republican Pete Hoekstra, Chair of the House Intelligence Committee, has criticized Bush for hiding more surveillance programs from Congressional oversight. The NY Times has published his criticism of Bush on this matter.

On Fox News Sunday, Hoekstra said that a whistleblower came to him with several more spying operations that were in danger of being abused without oversight.

Wait… several more??

Hoekstra: …this is actually a case where the whistleblower process was working appropriately. Some people within the intelligence community brought to my attention some programs that they believed we had not been briefed on. They were right. We have now been briefed on those programs, but I wanted to reinforce to the President and to the executive branch in the intelligence community how important and by law–the requirement that they keep the legislative branch informed of what they are doing.

See video at Crooks and Liars

So…. first, an internal whistleblower comes to him because he knows that the legislative branch hasn’t even been informed about several other spying operations.

Then, once it’s clear that this is the case, they are (probably very partially) informed under a question-and-answer format?

Even this Republican ally says

“The U.S. Congress simply should not have to play Twenty Questions to get the information that it deserves under our Constitution.”

So what are you going to do about it, Congress?

What are you going to do about it?

Grassroots Activist Actions of Day

Grassroots Activist Actions of Day

Comments 0 Comment

Don’t Block Our Voices

You elected them! They represent you! Yet some lawmakers don’t want to hear from you anymore and have set up technology to block your messages! Not long ago, Congressional offices started to adopt new technology that blocks emails sent through organizational websites. More than 100 nonprofit organizations responded with a resounding “No!” and now it’s your turn.

Tell Congress not to block your communications to them
(Consumers Union)

Don’t Weaken Identity Theft Protections

The House may vote soon on federal proposals that may limit your state’s ability to better protect you against identity theft. Incredibly, this bill would let companies that lose your sensitive information decide whether to tell you about it. That means companies could leave you in the dark when they fail to keep your personal information protected. The bill also would make you wait until after you’ve become a victim of identity theft to freeze access to your credit files to stop crooks from opening fraudulent accounts in your name. Most states that have adopted security freeze laws let consumers exercise this right before the damage is done.

Tell Congress this is unacceptable, and that you want strong identity theft protections!
(Consumers Union)

Don’t Block Our Internet Access to Content and Services
The House recently voted against preserving the open nature of the Internet; but this week a Senate committee will vote on whether to preserve Internet freedom. Tell the Senate to vote to prevent the cable and phone companies who own the Internet’s pipes and wires from impairing or blocking your access to Internet services and content.

Act now.
(Consumers Union)

Shame on You Verizon Wireless
A federal Administrative Law Judge recently found that Verizon Wireless illegally disciplined a pro-union worker and interfered with employees’ rights to form or support a union. And Verizon Wireless workers say the company used “scare tactics” and intimidation to prevent employees from joining unions. Verizon Wireless forced its employees to do its dirty work—a federal investigation revealed a company rule requiring employees to report all union activity at their worksite, as part of the company’s national “Emergency Procedures.” And in an action reminiscent of Wal-Mart’s closure of a Quebec store when its employees formed a union, Verizon Wireless shut down a call center after its employees moved closer to getting their union. Verizon Wireless’ top competitor—Cingular Wireless—honors its employees’ wishes if they choose to form a union. Even employees at Verizon’s landline division have union representation—65,000 of them, in fact! Verizon Wireless workers simply desire what their colleagues have—the right to have a say in their working conditions, some job security, and protection from unfair treatment and firings.

Tell Verizon Wireless to Stop Interfering With Employees Who Want To Form Unions
(American Rights at Work)

Here We Go Again! Stop Big Media from Eliminating the Cross-Ownership Limitations
The Federal Communications Commission and industry lobbyists are trying to let huge media companies get even bigger by resurrecting the same rule changes that millions of Americans rejected in 2003. FCC Chairman Kevin Martin — backed by the biggest media giants — is angling to eliminate the newspaper-broadcast “cross-ownership” ban that prevents a single conglomerate from owning the major daily newspaper as well as radio and TV stations in a single market. And he wants to lift local ownership caps on how many TV stations one company can own in your town. If these rule changes were approved, one company could own the major paper, eight radio stations and three television stations in the same city. A handful of huge companies already control nearly all of the media in America. Such concentration destroys local news, sidelines dissenting views, and stifles competition. When we allow one company to own everything, we lose the diversity of views that is the lifeblood of our democracy. If he prevails, we will see the further demise of local news, independent voices and critical journalism. In 2003, your letters and calls stopped this nonsense. Now we need to do it again.

Tell the FCC that Big Media is Big Enough
(Stop Big Media)

Stop the Slash and Burn of Reserve Wetlands

The Bush administration has announced plans to sell oil and gas leases on long-protected wildlife habitat in Alaska’s Western Arctic Reserve as early as this September. Nestled in the northeastern corner of the reserve, the sensitive wetlands surrounding Lake Teshekpuk provide a pristine nesting area for tens of thousands of migratory birds, and calving grounds for the 46,000-member Teshekpuk Lake caribou herd. But the Bush administration would strip the area of federal protections and allow oil giants such as ConocoPhillips to destroy this Arctic sanctuary with gravel mines, roads, drill pads, pipelines and processing facilities.

Tell Interior Secretary Kempthorne to halt the September lease sale.
(Save BioGems)

Support Women’s Rights in Afghanistan
As the Taliban militia returns and increases its violent attacks against women to prevent them from exercising their rights, we must urge Congress to support organizations that promote and protect women’s rights and the women-led nonprofits that provide urgently needed assistance to women and girls.

Take Action
(Feminist Majority/Democracy in Action)

No Permanent Bases in Iraq – Sign Biden’s Petition

No Permanent Bases in Iraq – Sign Biden’s Petition

Comments 1 comment

I support Senator Biden’s Amendment to bar any funds from being used to establish permanent U.S. military bases in Iraq or to control Iraq’s oil. I disagree with Biden’s stated opinion on the following points: I don’t think it’s at all “obvious to most Americans” that we have no designs or Iraq’s oil or strategic control of bases, nor do I believe that such topics can so easily be pushed off into the realm of “conspiracy theory” tinfoil-hatland anymore. I don’t even believe that for many Americans the idea of our being there to get “our oil out from under their sand” is a significant ethical issue. Sometimes it seems that even “freedom and democracy” is just insider code for “steal our natural resources.” Maybe it’s just me… In any case, it’s significant that the provision that both the Senate and the House had separately approved was stripped from the bill. It’s significant that this administration will not say that we aren’t building permanent bases. By some accounts, they are already nearing completion.

No Permanent Bases in Iraq.
Sign Senator Joe Biden’s petition.

Last week, the Senate and House voted on a joint emergency spending bill to support our troops in Iraq. That’s the good news. The bad news is that Republicans stripped out a key provision proposed by me and Representative Barbara Lee – and that the Senate and House had each separately approved — that would bar any funds from being used to establish permanent U.S. military bases in Iraq or to control Iraq’s oil.

That will make life even more difficult for our men and women in uniform and undercut our nation’s broader effort against terrorism.

While it may be obvious to most Americans that we don’t intend to stay in Iraq indefinitely and that we have no designs on its oil, such conspiracy theories are accepted as fact by many Iraqis. In an opinion poll conducted by the University of Maryland in January 2006, 80 percent of Iraqis – and 92 percent of the Sunni Arabs — believe we have plans to establish permanent military bases.

These views extend well beyond Iraq. In a 2004 Pew Charitable Trust survey, majorities in all four Muslim states surveyed — Turkey, Pakistan, Jordan, and Morocco — believed that control of Mideast oil was an important factor in our invasion of Iraq.

Why do Iraqis and the rest of the region believe we want permanent bases? Why do they think we would subject ourselves to the enormous ongoing costs in Iraq? Do they think we want their sand? No, they think we want their oil.

Osama bin Laden and like-minded jihadists use the U.S. “occupation” and their assertion that we aim to steal the region’s oil as rallying cries in their regular calls to arms.

Before we dismiss the resonance of their propaganda, we must remember what Iraqis have been through in the past three decades: three wars and a tyrannical regime that turned paranoia into a way of life. And there’s a longer history, too: 400 years of British and Ottoman occupation have led to a deeply ingrained suspicion of foreign military presence.

Our military leadership understands the importance of this issue. Last September, General John Abizaid, the commander of all US troops in the Middle East, told Congress: “We must make clear to the people of the region we have no designs on their territory or resources.”

No Permanent Bases in Iraq.

Against this backdrop, I had hoped the Congress would speak clearly because the Bush Administration has not.

To my knowledge, President Bush has never explicitly stated that we will not establish permanent bases in Iraq. And both the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State have left the door open to do just that.

In February, Secretary Rumsfeld told the Senate Committee on Armed Services: “We have no intention, at the present time, of putting permanent bases in Iraq.”

That same month, in response to a question about our policy on bases from my colleague Senator John Kerry, Secretary Rice told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee: “I don’t want to in this forum try to prejudice everything that might happen way into the future.”

Just last Thursday, columnist Helen Thomas asked the White House press secretary to unambiguously declare that the United States will not seek permanent bases in Iraq. Again, the press secretary could not unequivocally declare this to be the case.

The failure to speak clearly on this issue feeds the conspiracy theories and vindicates those who ascribe the worst intentions to the United States. They also make it that much more difficult to win the battle for the hearts and minds of 1.2 billion Muslims in the world. Our success in that battle will determine our success in the struggle between freedom and radical fundamentalism.

I’ve introduced the amendment again, to the Defense (Authorization) bill that is now being debated by the Senate. It may not immediately change a lot of minds on the ground or in the region. But it can mark the beginning of a sustained effort to demonstrate through words and deeds that we have no intention of controlling Iraq’s oil or staying there forever.

It’s beyond time for the American people to have spoken clearly on this important issue. The Bush Administration has not.

But we can.

Please sign the petition to support our efforts to convince the world that we have no desire for permanent bases in Iraq or to control that country’s oil.

No Permanent Bases in Iraq.

What greater mockery of the flag?

What greater mockery of the flag?

Comments 1 comment

In the previous post, I made mention of the language of the sacred. If the government decrees that the flag is sacred, does that violate the separation of church and state?

As may be, it’s actually going to come to a vote in the Senate. We may only be able to sit and watch our government amend the First Amendment to restrict political freedom of expression.

So this seems to be the overall plan – get as much power away from the judicial branch as possible by handing it to Congress and the executive branch. Where Congress isn’t pliant enough, then disempower Congress, and focus on executive power.

The US Supreme Court ruled in 1989 that the First Amendment to the Constitution protected Americans’ right to desecrate the flag as a means of free expression. Interesting – the majority opinion was joined by Scalia.

Back in 1997, Dr. Roger Pilon, Ph.D., J.D broke with colleagues at the libertarian/conservative think tank Cato Institute in his testimony before the Subcommittee on the Judiciary of the House. It’s worth a read – here’s my favorite part:

Sir Winston Churchill captured well that essential feature of our system when he observed in 1945 that “the United States is a land of free speech. Nowhere is speech freer–not even [in England], where we sedulously cultivate it even in its most repulsive forms.” In so observing, Churchill was merely echoing thoughts attributed to Voltaire, that he may disapprove of what you say but would defend to the death your right to say it, and the ironic question of Benjamin Franklin: “Abuses of the freedom of speech ought to be repressed; but to whom are we to commit the power of doing it?”

When so many for so long have understood the principles at issue today, how can this Congress so lightly abandon those principles? It is said by some that the flag is a special case, a unique symbol. That claim may be true, but it does not go to the principle of the matter: in a free society, individuals have a right to express themselves, even in offensive ways. Once we bar such expression, however, Franklin’s question will immediately be upon us. What is more, we will soon find that the flag is not unique, that the Bible and much else will next be in line for special protection.

It is said also that the flag is special because men have fought and died for it. Let me suggest in response that men have fought and died not for the flag but for the principles it represents. People give their lives for principles, not for symbols. When we dishonor those principles, to protect their symbol, we dishonor the men who died to preserve them. That is not a business this Congress should be about. We owe it to those men, men who have made the ultimate sacrifice, to resist the pressures of the moment so that we may preserve the principles of the ages.

After all, free expression and the right to dissent are among the core principles that the American flag is meant to represent. What greater defacement of the flag can there be than to shift its meaning into something that makes a mockery of American values and rights? Freedom of expression is one of the the truest tests of our dedication to the principles that our flag is supposed to represent.

Flag Issue History – Resources

Three countries ban flag-burning – Quick! Who are they?

Iran | China | Cuba

Oppose Flag Idolatry

Oppose Flag Idolatry

Comments 7 comments

Oppose the “Flag Anti-desecration” Amendment.

First off, notice the language of religion and the sacred here. To “desecrate” is to violate the sacredness of something. To be “anti-desecration” is to be against the violation of the sacred. This assumes that the flag is holy, sacred, sanctified, blessed, consecrated.

The American flag should not be made into a golden calf, a graven image; to worship the symbol would be a grave mistake.*

Making a “holy” thing of the American flag is a form of idolatry. The flag is only a piece of cloth. It is wrong to worship a flag. (On this one issue I still agree with the Jehovah’s Witnesses.)

The flag is, at its best, an emblem or symbol of the United States of America. To focus on the symbol is a way of forgetting that to which it points. What it’s meant to stand for are things like our constitutionally-protected rights and values, our freedom, our democracy. (Unfortunately, in some places it stands for other things.)

It is also symbolic of America that we don’t worship a flag. Have one, don’t worship it. We have freedom of expression. Criticism of actions and policies of our government is also a form of patriotism, and part of a functional democracy in the land of the free.

The more important and “sacred” the flag becomes, the uglier the country becomes (including ours). There is a huge difference between patriotism and nationalism. Self-aborbed nationalism is a dead end in our world. We are crossing that line into a major fall already.

Of course, if they somehow pass this thing, a lot of Americans are going to be in deep trouble some weeks after Independence Day (you know, that celebration now referred to as “4th of July”) when ratty flags start getting reported. Maybe that’s one way to start people snitching on one another. Maybe it would even stop the practice of requiring that international students pledge their loyalty in homeroom to a piece of cloth that signifies a country that isn’t even theirs. Or not. (I wonder how many Americans would tolerate that in another country?)

Why are these pseudo-Christians so tied up with flag issues? You’d think they might see the idolatry in it, but maybe not. The current governor of Georgia got elected on the Confederate flag.

What a cowardly path to take. With so many more important issues and challenges facing us, this transparently political strategy is yet another issue aimed at igniting hate and fanning its flames. Like so many other interpretations held by this administration, it is profoundly anti-American. I suppose that anyone who happens to mention that freedom of expression is a Constitutional right, and that enforced patriotism in a democracy seems a little strange will then be called “treasonous”?

We would do better in this global economy to open up to other friendly countries, rather than set ourselves so pridefully and arrogantly above all others. We aren’t in the Crusades or the Inquisitions or the Witch Hunts (not yet anyway). We’re not going to accept Bush as a king, an emperor, or (a) god.

We’re not ready to say “Heil,” not even in Georgia.

The flag itself is meaningful as a symbol of our freedom and democracy, neither of which seem particularly valuable to this administration.

Oppose the “Flag Anti-desecration” Amendment. Oppose flag idolatry.

Oh, and Congress? Get off this constitutional amendment kick. We all know you have something better to do.

*Nelson, I rewrote this a bit after yr email (but yes, it’s a pun). Post revised June 14th.

Rant on the So-called Marriage Amendment

Rant on the So-called Marriage Amendment

Comments 0 Comment

Tell Congress you oppose the “marriage” amendment to our Constitution. I did….

How dare you try to amend our Constitution to discriminate against any American citizen? How dare you appeal to hate? How dare you use God for this!

This is so low, so hypocritical. You won’t dabate Iraq, but you WILL debate this?

Is this what you have left to say about “compassionate conservatism”? You’ve let pseudo-christian dominionists (otherwise known as supremacists) gain too much power in our process because you think hate will motivate enough votes that the rigged elections can be rationalized.

These people want to bring back stoning! In America! They are wayyy too concerned with how to control other people. It won’t stop with this – gays aren’t the only people they hate. They want to put women “back in the box” as well, and they are training the children just like little Hitler youth with their home-schooling programs. Some even speak of a return to slavery.

But that’s not even what it’s about, is it? Because in addition to payback to the terrorist christian right – remember these are the people who incited to murder, bombed clinics, etc – this is really about something else.

It’s about insurance. You want to nip that “alternative family insurance” movement in the bud. You know, at the behest of the people who wrote the laws for the prescription drug “benefit”? It wouldn’t look good to talk about poor grandma raising her grandchildren, or the single moms or dads doing the best the can. Noooooo….you have to find that bigotry that remains, and work it, baby, work it.

Meanwhile, the dollar seems (to me at least) ready to plummet, Iraq is a disaster, Iran is about to become a disaster, Halliburton and ExxonMobil walk off with our money, and you don’t think there are any monuments in New York so you’re cutting homeland security funds. People are dying, people are hurting. There are parts of America that are as poor as any third-world nation, but you’re in bed with crony corporatists (when you don’t have prostitutes or long-term buddies from college to sleep with and promote).

You want to lecture us about morality? You want to use our own constitution for power, for hate? You have profoundly misunderstood the nature of this country. This country belongs to WE THE PEOPLE.

You’ve handed power to the executive branch. You’ve destroyed our country. You’ve taken our future. Keep going, and you’ll be showing up for photo ops in your hoods or uniforms or whatever.

The Nazis had their scapegoats too.
Shame on you. Shame on you. Shame on you.

You fundamentalists have lost
the thing most fundamental.
Pharasees again, in code
have lost or burned the message.
You fanatics worship manmade creeds
that will undo us all
And YOU, you terrorists of all religions
your gods will make us fall.

Yes I confess this deep deep flaw,
this remnant of rigidity,
scar-tissue of self-righteousness,
torn open yet again.
Yet one must speak from where one stands
and this is what I know,
I have no room left in my heart
for love toward you to grow.

The evil that your “god” incites
in you and o’er the world,
stains for all time our histories,
we all pay for your sins.
I guard compassion jealously
held selfish in reserve
for the ones you hurt so deeply
and whose stories aren’t heard.

I name you and yours false prophets
because you do define the phrase,
you lead the would-be faithful
always far and further astray.
Placing demon masks
on the faces of our kin,
undoing all the fragile good
that lets us breathe again.