A Question of Conviction

It is incredible that Senate Democrats are so pitiful and disconnected with their constituency. In spite of the deafening uproar of disenfranchised Democratic voters after the 2000 election who called for Democratic Senators to defeat the newly appointed president's nominations for the Federal Courts and other government positions, nearly every single one was confirmed with the minimum of resistance. This wimpiness demonstrated to the administration that they could nominate even more obnoxious candidates for even more sensitive positions, thus the appointments of the Johns, Negroponte and Bolton. Roberts was seen as a wash on the SCOTUS but, should have been questioned more pointedly and aggressively. However, handing over SCOTUS to absolute Conservative control by not filibustering Alito was beyond stupid, it was spineless or complicit.

Yet, the aforementioned appointments lacked, in varying degrees, the certainty we now have that this administration is all about ending democracy and is willing to openly violate all existing laws to accomplish that goal. Bush's admission of eavesdropping on American citizens without a legally required warrant removes any mitigation the administration might have claimed. They are guilty of felonies by violating the very laws written and enacted by this Congress and yet, the Senate today approved the appointment of the person responsible for implementing the illegal wiretap program in defiance of the rule of law.

As for Republican approval of General Hayden to head the CIA, as much as the act is treacherous it is also expected from the party of Fascist dogma and theocratic zealotry. Each Republican member of Congress is a fully owned subsidiary of one global corporation or another and would cease to hold their seat if they dared to step out of line. This situation exists only because corporations have succeeded in making Republicans completely dependant on their funding to achieve and hold office and by the Republican politician's compliance with this unwritten contract.

Democrats are equally exposed to the corruption and influence of corporations but have not, as yet, totally surrendered their integrity. Obvious exceptions, such as Bill Jefferson must be expected, but it is the less obvious ones that truly hurt the Party. To identify which Democratic Senators are now or are swiftly becoming DINOs (Democrats In Name Only) one need only review the voting for confirmation of General Hayden to head the CIA.

Let me save you the trouble. Here are the Democrats in the Senate who do not feel that we as citizens deserve protection of our freedoms:

Akaka HI
Baucus MT
Biden DE
Bingaman NM
Byrd WV
Cantwell WA
Carper DE
Feinstein CA
Johnson SD
Kohl WI
Landrieu LA
Lautenburg NJ
Leahy VT
Levin MI
Lieberman CT
Lincoln AR
Mikulski MD
Murray WA
Nelson FL
Nelson NE
Pryor AR
Reed RI
Reid NV
Sarbanes MD
Schumer NY
Stabenow MI

If the Democratic Party, and by that I mean the voters not the office holders, ever hope to regain a majority in Congress we need to understand the need to get rid of members who repeatedly vote with Republicans on issues that have a catastrophic effect on that goal. Several of the names listed above are those of recognized leaders within the Party who have a greater potential to help or harm Democratic objectives. Senators like Joe Biden with presidential aspirations, but who has done more to help the conservative cause by advocating and pushing through the crushingly undemocratic bankruptcy bill, are deserving of ouster from the Party. Senator Feinstein, with her ethically challenged husband and questionable financial dealings, is prone to speaking from both sides of her face on issues affecting her favorite special interests. And what is left to say about Senator Lieberman that has not already been said by the entire Republican Party as well as Fox News? Oh wait, that would only be laudatory statements. Let's just say that if Joe loses his seat in Congress it will be absolutely his own doing. He made the mistake of getting into a seat on the Left side of the aisle when he is so richly deserving of one on the Right.

Please take the time to contact the Senators who voted against our freedoms by approving General Hayden as Chief Spy-Master at the CIA and let them know that we do not appreciate our REPRESENTATIVES failing to represent us with the powers of the offices to which WE elected them. Let them know that what they may perceive as compromise is actually conceding to this administration because Bush and his posse do not and will not negotiate with anyone.

Signing Statements

The Boston Globe recently published a story by Charlie Savage detailing President Bush’s claimed constitutional authority to place himself above the laws issued by the Congress of the United States. Mr. Savage reveals the strategy Bush has employed by not using his veto power since taking office. Basically, Bush signs bills into law then issues a “signing statement” exempting the chief executive from adhering to the very law he just enacted.

Without fail, Bush’s justification for declaring himself exempt has been his constitutional authority as interpreted by the president and his legal counsel. Incredibly, he has exempted himself from over 750 bills enacted as law by his own signature.

As citizens, we also have constitutional rights. We are all entitled to the protections under those rights and the liberties guaranteed by them. It is only logical then, that when Congress passes a law that imposes upon our rights and/or liberties that we must have the same prerogative to exempt ourselves from the oppressive nature of that law.

I am proposing the use of “Citizen Signing Statements” to be issued by individual citizens to interpret your personal understanding of a law and how, or even if, that law applies to you.

Below is an example of a Citizen Signing Statement based on a statement issued by President Bush for one of the many laws he intends to ignore. Please, feel free to copy and modify the statement to apply to any law you feel particularly adamant about and from which you would like to be exempt.

Constitutionality Signing Statement

I, ____(name)____, as a citizen of the United States of America and a licensed driver in the state of Connecticut, shall construe as advisory the provisions of the Connecticut Seat Belt Law that purport to direct or burden the conduct of an adult operator of a motor vehicle with the mandatory usage of seat belts even when no other passengers are in the vehicle, which purport to direct drivers to conform to legislation originated and promoted by the insurance industry and intended to achieve specific policy objectives which would monetarily benefit said industry by reducing the number of traffic accident related injuries, but containing no provision for the reduction of policy premiums to the consumers.

Such provisions, if construed as mandatory rather than advisory, would impermissibly interfere with citizens' constitutional liberties under the fourth amendment to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures as well as the eighth amendment banning cruel and unusual punishment as would surely be the case of any penalty imposed for the victimless crime of failure to use a seat belt.