Lawbreaker in Chief

This is must read stuff from WIRED by the executive director of the Stanford Law School's Center for Internet and Society. Start with the first two sentences:

Ignorance of the law is no defense. Someone should tell the president.

Ouch! Guess that applies to the Vice President and the Attorney General, too?

Here are the final two paragraphs of the piece:

Until recently, Congress and the courts have been open-minded about the administration's arguments in light of recent terrorist attacks and the nation's enduring war in Iraq. But that pattern of deference is about to change. The Senate, at least temporarily, has suspended debate on reauthorizing the USA Patriot Act, perhaps out of concern that the administration doesn't plan on following whatever rules Congress puts in place. Republican Sen. John McCain has pushed his anti-torture bill over strong administration objections. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that citizens detained in Guantanamo are entitled to lawyers and some due process. As Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote in last year's opinion in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, "a state of war is not a blank check for the president when it comes to the rights of the nation's citizens."

I think that 2006 will be a time when we look back on this surveillance with a clearer eye -- one that takes in these violations, the lack of due process at Guantanamo and the government's sanctioning of torture as illegal acts. In that light, recent administration speeches are less justifications of government policy than they are admissions of guilt.

You owe it to yourself to read the entire piece.

Anyone hear any member of our state's Congressional delegation speak out in favor of protecting our civil liberties in the past week or so? The silence is deafening!

Thank you, Mr. President-dictator, Sir!

Earlier this week, the House of Representatives failed to vote on Congressman Richard Baker's bill to afford help to homeowners whose property was damaged by either Katrina or Rita.

According to the Times Picayune, it turns out it was the Bush White House that left Louisiana's citizens and congressional delegation out to dry.

Baker says the White House says they'll be happy to talk about it in the New Year. Uh, the White House's man on the ground isn't so sure.

Apparently, the only thing Bush is certain about is that he's in charge and the law is whatever he says it is!

Profile in Integrity: Spy Court Judge Quits In Protest

Not everyone is content to merely stand around and criticize the Bush administration's Wars on the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The Washington Post reports that a member of the federal Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court has resigned in protest of President Bush's illegal and unconstitutional use of the National Security Agency to intercept foreign and domestic communications.

Merry Christmas, Katrina & Rita Victims, from your Republican friends in the U.S. Congress!

The Republican-controlled United States House of Representatives has refused to endorse a plan to help Louisiana homeowners devastated by hurricanes Katrina and Rita. The plan was proposed by one of their own, Republican Congressman Richard Baker of Louisiana.

Oh, but I noticed the Republicans did managed to make cuts in programs that help the poor and middle class and are still working on more tax cuts for the rich.

You can read Congressman Baker's statement on the failure here. A lesser man would have pointed out that this was less-than-compassionate conservatism.

Merry Christmas, Louisiana hurricane victims, from your friends in the Republican-controlled United States House of Representatives!

Be Careful What You Ask For — At the Library!

I found a link to this story at a business site. It describes a visit by federal Homeland Security Agents to a college student's home after the student requested the library order a book for him that was research material for a political science class.

Now, this action was taken under the auspices of the USA Patriot Act, which Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and others have succeeded in blocking until respect for the civil liberties of American citizens (like this student) are given more protection.

The Bush administration has used the war on terror to launch a campaign to essentially shred the constitution in the name of war powers for the presidency. This is not what this country is supposed to be about. Read the story about this college student and understand what this argument is about.

Scanlon bragged about controlling legislative districts in Louisiana

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports that a Texas district attorney is considering an investigation into the Indian casino-funded, Jack Abramoff-related lobbying activities of former Christian Coalition leader Ralph Reed.

Here's a synopsis of the focus of the potential inquiry:

An investigation would focus more attention on Reed's work for Abramoff — a three-year partnership in which Reed conducted anti-gambling campaigns in Texas, Louisiana and Alabama. Two of Abramoff's tribal clients, eager to preserve their casino markets, funneled Reed more than $5 million toward his efforts.

Now, ethics laws vary across state lines, so it could be that there is nothing to investigate at the state level, though the article suggests that Texas lobbying laws might apply to Reed's activities there.

This paragraph raises questions about the extent of the influence that Abramoff, his associate Michael Scanlon, and Reed wielded in Louisiana:

Reed's work was part of a larger effort by Abramoff and his partner, Michael Scanlon, to sell the Louisiana Coushatta tribe on the need to expand its political clout into Texas. "Can you imagine the power of controlling legislative districts in the state of Texas in the same fashion as your home state?" Scanlon wrote to a tribal official, according to an e-mail released by a Senate committee.

The Scanlon quote comes from an e-mail that turned up in Senator John McCain's investigation into Abramoff's operation. The Abramoff operation, which might well have funded a broader web of Washington corruption, was financed primarily by the Louisiana Coushatta Indians, owners of the casino and hotel operations based near the Allen Parish town of Kinder, Louisiana.

Scanlon has recently agreed to cooperate with a federal criminal investigation into Abramoff's various activities, which reportedly include bribery of members of Congress and the executive branch.

What do we know about the extent of the influence Abramoff, Scanlon and Reed had in Louisiana, particularly during the second term of Governor Mike Foster (that's when the Jena Choctaws were closest to get their casino license and the time when Abramoff was exerting his influence in the U.S. Department of the Interior)? It is documented that this is when Abramoff hooked up with then-Congressman David Vitter.

But, what else were they doing in Louisiana? Which legislative districts did they control here? Has this ever been investigated? Where's the attorney general's office on this? What about a district attorney in the Allen Parish area?

NYT: "We are about to lose New Orleans"

The New York Times' editorial (link via Truthout.org) today says it all:

We are about to lose New Orleans. Whether it is a conscious plan to let the city rot until no one is willing to move back or honest paralysis over difficult questions, the moment is upon us when a major American city will die, leaving nothing but a few shells for tourists to visit like a museum.

Why? Because President Bush and the Republican controlled Congress are reneging on their commitment to build a levee system that can protect the Crescent City.

The rumbling from Washington that the proposed cost of better levees is too much has grown louder. Pretending we are going to do the necessary work eventually, while stalling until the next hurricane season is upon us, is dishonest and cowardly. Unless some clear, quick commitments are made, the displaced will have no choice but to sink roots in the alien communities where they landed.

The price tag for protection against a Category 5 hurricane, which would involve not just stronger and higher levees but also new drainage canals and environmental restoration, would very likely run to well over $32 billion. That is a lot of money. But that starting point represents just 1.2 percent of this year's estimated $2.6 trillion in federal spending, which actually overstates the case, since the cost would be spread over many years. And it is barely one-third the cost of the $95 billion in tax cuts passed just last week by the House of Representatives.

Total allocations for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the war on terror have topped $300 billion. All that money has been appropriated as the cost of protecting the nation from terrorist attacks. But what was the worst possible case we fought to prevent?

The editorial makes it clear that there are responsibilities that reside closer to home:

Of course, New Orleans's local and state officials must do their part as well, and demonstrate the political and practical will to rebuild the city efficiently and responsibly. They must, as quickly as possible, produce a comprehensive plan for putting New Orleans back together. Which schools will be rebuilt and which will be absorbed? Which neighborhoods will be shored up? Where will the roads go? What about electricity and water lines? So far, local and state officials have been derelict at producing anything that comes close to a coherent plan. That is unacceptable.

But, ultimate responsibility resides where the power is:

The city must rise to the occasion. But it will not have that opportunity without the levees, and only the office of the president is strong enough to goad Congress to take swift action. Only his voice is loud enough to call people home and convince them that commitments will be met.

The paper then calls for something the President abhors: straight talk.

Maybe America does not want to rebuild New Orleans. Maybe we have decided that the deficits are too large and the money too scarce, and that it is better just to look the other way until the city withers and disappears. If that is truly the case, then it is incumbent on President Bush and Congress to admit it, and organize a real plan to help the dislocated residents resettle into new homes. The communities that opened their hearts to the Katrina refugees need to know that their short-term act of charity has turned into a permanent commitment.

If the rest of the nation has decided it is too expensive to give the people of New Orleans a chance at renewal, we have to tell them so. We must tell them we spent our rainy-day fund on a costly stalemate in Iraq, that we gave it away in tax cuts for wealthy families and shareholders. We must tell them America is too broke and too weak to rebuild one of its great cities.

Our nation would then look like a feeble giant indeed. But whether we admit it or not, this is our choice to make. We decide whether New Orleans lives or dies.

What has become clear is that New Orleans flooded because of flaws in the work of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. If inflicting this harm on New Orleans was the action of a national agency, rescuing it is a national responsibility.

The sad news is that this Republican administration and this Republican-controlled Congress have shown little in the way of responsible behavior, particularly in response to the storms that hit here in September (ask Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour).

Once, we had a president who said the buck stopped at his desk when it came to responsibility. The buck still stops at that desk in that office, no matter what the current occupant of that office believes.