Why Congress Treats The Constitution Like A Toy
Imagine yourself as the parent of a willful, destructive child who lives to break things. Every rattle -- split. Every cup -- cracked. Every toy -- destroyed. Every stuffed animal -- ripped to shreds. All of this behavior is punctuated by continued whining and crying when objects presented to him somehow don't work any more.
Why then, on God's green earth, would any parent give the child a priceless vase, knowing it will be reduced to shards in a few moment's time, even if those few moments are a respite between tantrums?
I wouldn't. You wouldn't. But the Congress of the United States will. The passage by the House last week, and the expected passage by the Senate this week, of the latest assault on our Constitution is nothing more than trying to take the easy way out by rewarding bad behavior. It's a triumph of Congressional self-importance over the guardianship of our rights.
The Democratic "leadership" wanted a bill President Bush would sign. That was the bottom line. It wouldn't matter if the Constitution got trashed. It wouldn't matter if the government was given too much authority. These "legislators" had to legislate, or else they would be made to look bad by a president whose policies are now opposed by about 80 percent of the American people. Heaven forbid there's no new legislation and the government has to operate with the authority already in place. How would that look? To some people, just fine. On the other hand, while the House "leadership" basks in its legislative glories, the Republicans go preening to the press on how they snookered the other side. They are only partially right. It's not fooling someone if that person knows what's going on is stupid yet participates willingly. That's what happened here.
Of course it's not only the "leadership" who were behind this travesty. The whining, self-important "Blue Dogs," Democrats from "conservative" districts also pushed for it so they can flaunt their credentials as tough on terrorists and strong on defense. Come on, little Blue Puppies. It's time to "man up" and to "woman up" on this. Try defending the Constitution for a change. Quit whimpering and hiding and defend freedom and the document to which you swore an oath to protect and to defend.
It was evident to anyone looking at the bill that the legislation took the idea of a warrant out of the hands of the most indulgent court in the land -- the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court that grants every request for a wiretap. It's simply a matter that the authorities can't be bothered with the niceties any more. Never mind that existing law allows for wiretapping now, with a warrant soon after.
No, the Executive Branch got something more. Rather than have a court review whether a wiretap is necessary, this new bill only allows a court to decide whether it had been correctly requested. The wiretap is presumed to be legal by the people ordering the wiretap. There's a bit of circular logic there. The emergency wiretapping can only take place under "exigent circumstances," which, in theory, are to happen only rarely. As Rep. James Langevin (D-RI) put it during the House debate: "This legislation will only work if everyone involved follows the rules and remains within the confines of the law."
Langevin raises the relevant point here. Who, exactly, are we rewarding with this new authority, and what have they done to deserve it? Let's go down the ever-increasing and depressing list. It's not like anyone can forget what was going on at DoJ. We are reminded every day by some new disclosure that the Department became more politicized than at any time in its history. We can start with hiring lawyers based on ideology. We can continue with firing U.S. Attorneys because they decline to file bogus voter-fraud cases against Democratic candidates. How about dropping or settling big law suits against special interests? And then, the big kahuna, spying on American citizens without warrants or authorization, knowing that it was likely illegal but doing it anyway. This was the program that even John Ashcroft refused to approve from his hospital bed. That's the shorthand. Eric Lichtblau's excellent book, "Bush's Law: The Remaking of American Justice," lays it all out. News stories every day now tell the stories of the Kyles, Monicas, Bradleys and the rest of the kiddies remaking the Justice Department in their own image. There might be grown-ups in charge now, but the doctrine remains the same.
How do you expect an administration so riddled with ideology and incompetence to follow the rules? On what basis would you even think that they would do so, having gone to such great lengths to break the rules and ignore the rules in the first place?
And, having placed its institutional faith in the Executive Branch to carry out these precepts, what did Congress get in return? First, self-congratulations all around. They are proud of the "compromise" they carefully crafted. A number of speakers, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), said this wasn't a bill she would like, they defended it anyway and yes, she voted for it. No one doubts that compromise is often a necessity in complex legislation. There are trade-offs between amounts of tax breaks for one industry versus another. There are trade-off of one highway project for another, or a compromise on how one industry should be regulated. It's much harder to defend a "compromise" that throws away a basic Constitutional value on the basis that a bill needed to be passed.
But legislative craftsmanship wasn't the only point that Congress "won" in this bill. There will be increased oversight and reports to the Congress. Huzzahs abound!! The administration that produced an attorney general as a witness whose reticence was more like an organized-crime witness of the 1950s hearings than a public servant will have increased oversight. Congress can hold more hearings. They can write more letters. Those have been great an effective tools up until now, right? Quite the tradeoff -- bloviating versus the saving the Constitution. I can see how that might be appealing to the majority of members of Congress who think well of themselves. They have done such a terrific job so far.
We shouldn't forget that the large telecom companies, the ones which want to control the Internet, are given their get-out-of-jail-free card with this bill. All of the civil suits against them for wiretapping without authorization will be dismissed. However, they will "come out of this with a taint," Pelosi reminded us. Somehow that seems inadequate.
The Blue Dogs in the House and the "conservative" Democrats in the Senate will vote for the bill, and three will be blind quotes in the paper justifying those actions as necessary because they come from "conservative" areas and would be in danger of losing their seats. For the record, Bob Barr, the former Congressman and current Libertarian candidate for president opposes the FISA bill. He's got to be more conservative than most of the groups and constituents of whom you and our "leadership" are deathly afraid. Stop acting like little kids afraid of the big bullies. This is the Constitution we're talking about. It isn't child's play.
Follow Art Brodsky on Twitter: www.twitter.com/artbrodsky
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
The Republicans just showed their hand, with Sam Brownback gloating over Obama's spinelessness in caving in to this FISA gutting. We can forget about the 'hidden variables' intrinsic to this kind of legislation. It is merely a tool to demoralize the Democrats.
And of course, to consolidate the Imperial Presidency.
Thank you for making a few things clear that may not be obvious to everyone. When has our congress done anything not in their own interest and in the interest of American government and the American people in any recent years? Both houses are so politicized and corrupt that it doesn't really matter whether there is an r or a d next to anyone's name. No one working inside our government actually cares about the constitution and the rule of law at this point; it is all leverage to use to negotiate more power or a better shower of money. Everyone thinks things will just magically improve when all the offices are held by the other team, but the truth is that they are all on the same team and it isn't ours.
Thank you Mr. Brodsky for this article: it's good to know there are still people with public voices who haven't sold out. And thank you RnR for bringing up Jonathan Alter's crap-out on Countdown last night. Up till then I had considerable respect for Mr. Alter; but not after he had the bald-faced gall to claim that this new FISA bill "restores the Constitution." I'm interested in seeing if Olbermann has one of his Special Comments if and when Obama finally gets his chance to put the final nail in the 4th amendment's coffin. But, being somewhat fond of this old planet, I won't hold my breath waiting for that particular Special Comment. This whole spectacle of "progressives" abandoning the Constitution for the sake of their chosen candidate is exactly what happens when "Political Correctness" comes to dominate every other consideration. The Constitution? Nice Enough. But Political Correctness? OMG it's the be all and end all! Yeah, PC! We wuv you to death!
I started reading Brodsky's article then I remembered the playground. There were always kids(one reason or another ) deciding the fate of the playground. There were terrific tricks played on the other kids to get things done their way. Bullies believe as long as I can intimidate and keep fear alive in the other kids. Life will be a bowl of cherries. The Others decided, I am not taking it anymore! Wow! Now, the bullies on the playground are looking over the shoulder and tapping the phone. It appears we have done 360 degrees of bullying. The Constitution is not treated as a toy. It is being hugged like a stuffed animal or doll by a toddler. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act? How could anyone give a blank check to do it. Are we just tired? Yes, I understand how difficult it is to make decisions for other people. Remembering to keep the lies together.Oh well, I will admit to everyone who reads this comment. When I talk on the phone I think of it as a party line like back in the day. May I suggest everyone else does the same.
Well people had a Chance with Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel. PEople threw that away and voted CFR. Now you have another chance with Ralph "I never caused Gore to lose and your an idiot if you think that" Nader and Bob Barr. ANY of these 2 guys would be a 100 times better than the CFR SCUM! Will people take the opportunity? NOOOOOOO because people are watching tv.
You're right! The guinea pigs don't even know what the CFR is, let alone what their agenda is. If you don't think they wield more power than any government, then you'd be silly wrong. I was hoping Barack wouldn't fall into that trap, and when he capitulates on this FISA bill, you'll know. We are watching you Barack! Do the right thing and fight this.
Obama's musings so far are - FISA bill with telecom immunity is good; I'd like to keep jobs in the USA but ya know, we're in a different kind of economy. I'm not going to hold him to the
public funding issue. He's accountable to nobody this way and it's starting to look like that's the plan. I'm not a happy camper, but at least I wasn't one of the kool aid drinkers.
MetalCanuck is right. Guys become very familiary with Agenda 21. Looks like we're moving right along into the next phase.
The American people are never properly presented with a serious lineup of candidates that includes progressives like Dennis Kucinich. Instead, they are given the same two choices they are always given. There is only a small group of people that can even name one of the alternative candidates at any time during any election. To blame the American people for their own ignorance when every major form of public media has been hijacked for years and you have to strain to get the truth is a bit rich. To add insult, the very people that are hijacking the media are the ones getting elected. I am sorry, but 'the people' NEVER had a chance. This is precisely the reason NOT to spend your one precious vote on a futile protest (voting for anyone that stands no chance of getting elected), but spend it smarter by looking at your local area and picking candidates that are known to be good government advocates with a chance of winning and not just silver-tongued with daddy's wallet in hand.
There is a weird complacency in the US these days.
Not just with Congress and the Senate. When talking
with people in my area the only concern is the day to day
family issues, not the Iraq occupation, not troop deaths,
not Iran and definately not Bush. The election gets a
little interest. The tainted tomatoes are actually getting the
most attention. Strange that Constitutional rights don't
hit the radar.
The media is to blame. Even Olbermann crapped out tonight along with Jonathan Alter, looking very
serious explaining that we're in deep trouble operating unconstitutionally unless the FISA bill gets passed.
Got to protect the old paycheck ya know? I'll never care what Olbermann says anymore, and Jonathan Alter is relegated to Dante's lowest level :)
It is a profound disappointment that Obama is using the same justification to defend his vote for retroactive immunity for the telecoms that Bush and the neo-cons use; that current national security needs trump the fourth amendment of the Constitution. Political expediency over principle. I worked my backside off to help Obama win the nomination but now I feel I have been betrayed.
I am ashamed of my party. I am ashamed of my nominee. There are only a few Senators like Russ Feingold and Chris Dodd that have the balls to stand up for us and the constitution. I have to ask, What will be different, when we have a majority of these weak willed jerk offs in power instead of the Repubs. That is always the problem with being presented with the lesser of two evils. It may not really be less evil, just not as confidant in their skill at it. If we would have had this group in 1776, we would all be singing praises to the Queen now.
Great summation, Art. You hit all of the relevant points dead on.
The bottom line is that we have a Congress unwilling to honor its sacred oath to preserve, protect, and defend the one document that defines us as a people and represents the very being and essence -- the essential spirit that animates or drives our nation, in terms of what we hold to be sacred and inviolable.
Apparently, most of our Congressmen, along with the entire Bush administration, and some, if not a majority on the Supreme Court, feel that our Constitution can be freely edited, excised, and amended like some college term paper or screenwriter's screenplay.
It's like you suggest, Art. It's as if they treat their oath, and the Constitution, not as something sacred but as some "pretend" sort of thing...like it's just "playtime"...just some kind of game. Disgraceful.
I honestly, truly - from the bottom of my heart- believe that many, many members of Congress actually, really don't know and don't remember that they took an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. I think that so many other thoughts and motives get in the way of so many members of Congress that they just plain forget about the very purpose of their being in that governmental body. Ditto for our President, but while he may sometimes be reminded with all the attention paid to his own individual actions, he just chuckles at the thought.
Well, it's been real and it's been fun..
"It's one oclock in the morning! Time to spend some quality time with the kids!!"
-Homer Simpson
Seriously, though.. I am going to sit down to a movie with my grandson before bed..
I sincerely encourage ya'all to actually READ the new FISA provisions.. When you do, you will see that not only are there NOT any US Constitutional conflicts, these new provisions actually ENHANCE the 4th Amendment rights of all Americans..
Now, if ya'all want to discuss the Telecomm Immunity issues, I am up for that as well.. But that's left to another commentary, as this particular subject appears to be about the CONSTITUTIONALITY of these new FISA measures..
Hasta Lasagna, don't get any on ya...
Michale....
Go to bed. You're rambling.
Enhance it. That is great. No longer requiring a warrant for the protection against unwarranted search and seizure, gosh what an enhancement.
You read it again. And this time get a constitutional authority to explain it for you. Maybe Turley or anyone from the ACLU. Play nicely with you children and teach them to never say anything bad about the president, because you think that it will be a good thing when America becomes another totalitarian country where such thought crimes are punished.
If it is such a good thing for America, how come bush and his playmates are wetting themselves in glee over what they just got the Democrats to do. I hear the sniggering in the halls of Congress is deafening.
Ahhh I see..
So, you are ONLY against it because the Bush Administration is FOR it..
You have no other logical or rational basis for your argument other than Bush is for it.
Your a Lemming... A lemming that follows the OPPOSITE course...
But still a lemming...
Michale.....
Yes, we should all be reminded to read because no one that typically gets halfway through commentary on an internet blog could be accused of reading anything. It sure is fun to be contrary and stir everyone up, but it is more fun to be accurate in your disagreement while doing it.
"but it is more fun to be accurate in your disagreement while doing it."
I could NOT possibly agree more..
That is why I urge everyone to read the actual House Measures and then point out where the Constitutional Conflict is.
What could POSSIBLY be more reasonable and logical??
Michale.....
What would happen if they did to the American Leaders the same thing that happened at Nuremberg?
Can a world court hold these people accountable?
They keep taking away our freedoms and most aren't even reading what they are voting for. Too many favors owed - too much money involved - and it is not only wiretapping it is everything. Some democrats have become shameful - what are they, "wanna be republicans"? No, they must be "libermantarians."
Let me ask you..
Have YOU read what they are voting for??
Michale.....
What the bill is intended to do is to remove the need to identify the specific target for spying or wiretapping. They are using the same techniques that were used in scanning Microwave transmissions in Europe during the cold war. All communications that are transmitted over microwave were captured and scanned for keywords, patterns and specific contacts.
Some of the new technology makes it harder to perform this type of spying here in the US. Having the cooperation of the telecoms to allow the capture within the fiberoptic network rather than trying to find a way to capture and translate that information from outside of the network, is the key to making this spying possible. In addition, it allows for the capture of all internet traffic as well.
A warrant requires me to identify the who and why, in at least minimal terms in order to get the warrant. The new spying protocol allows them to capture all and look for patters, keywords and any other criteria they can think of. It also allows them to spy on people and groups they see as opponents and political enemies. These might seem a little embarassing to bring up in a warrant.
Great piece, Art! This is exactly why Sens Dodd and Feingold, and Rep Kucinich are my heros.
I have to agree totally. This amazing Constitution is being trashed continually with out question. When are these puerile representatives going to read that document? Have we no shame? Have they no shame? Why do we continually vote to retain them in our House and Senate? Wake up America before it is all gone.
There's nothing more "conservative" than defending the clear intent of the Constitution.
And - if collection of all our international communications for a permanent digital dossier on all of us is now the only way to find "terrorists" - the "conservative" approach is to draft and proffer a CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, as the Constitution provides.
What underlies the word "conservative" in America today - what drives most of the Blue Dogs - is RACISM, pure and simple. Their seething, suppressed hatred of African-Americans is being openly released, in spades, against Arabs and Muslims, with the national media's blessing. Republicans are having the time of their lives HATING whole classes of "other" people in the name of fighting terrorism.
Secretly, behind closed doors, our Congress has agreed to the proposition that the Fourth Amendment somehow doesn't apply - not to "surveillance" as normally understood, of a person or place, but to the wholesale COLLECTION and recording of the massive data stream carried via the communications infrastructure between America and select foreign nations. NOT because the American half of the data stream can't be pre-identified and screened out in advance as FISA would direct (it mostly can be), but because their software threat-searching programs need as much data as possible to work effectively in their "fishing expeditions." THAT'S what's hidden behind the lies about this bill.
Tune in to C-SPAN2 tonight for the next stage of this out-and-out daylight robbery of our privacy rights.
The 4th Amendment DOESN'T apply in these new FISA measures...
READ the measures and you will KNOW this to be true..
Talk about living in a fantasy world...
Michale.....
Hmm...just read your profile. And I'll admit: You sucked me in! Good job! I posted a reply to an earlier post of yours, but now, no reason to. After all...
...calling nuclear power "our only alternative to oil in the foreseeable future"...and calling "Human Caused Climate Change"...an "hysterical con job"
Bingo!
(Are you having fun yet?)
Why doesn't the Fourth Amendment apply - because you said so?
Argue the facts and I'll listen. Name call out of sheer spite and I won't.
What are the "new" measures you speak of? FISA has NEVER covered non-Americans outside the U.S.. FISA IMPLEMENTS the Fourth Amendment in the area of foreign intelligence gathering INSIDE THE UNITED STATES.
No, you'd never know that if you listed to the Republicans LYING on the Senate and House floors about FISA's "foreign intelligence" provisions, with impunity, to the American people. If this was truly about "foreign intelligence" overseas - and therefore beyond the reach of FISA - we wouldn't be discussing this bill, and the secret FISA Court ITSELF would not have struck down the sweeping new data collection on AMERICANS that this bill - without specifying the details - clearly tries to make UNConstitutional room for.
http://harpers.org/subjects/NoComment
Congress nor the President nor both in concert have any authority to unapply the bill of rights. these were restrictions on the government. If you dont like the constitution go some where else.
I have to say I agree with this idea somewhat; there seems to be a vague, unsavory element to almost everything the current group of people labeled as conservatives in America does. I am not sure if it is extreme racism as it is more a general contempt for diversity and the true nature of the world and it's people. This is why Obama will be the best thing that could ever happen to America and it will likely be the final page if mccain is elected.
The Weinmar Republic was a democracy. Not all the members of the Reichstag were Nazis.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
