Bonehead of the Week: Representative Don Young (R-AK)

I don't know if you guys have seen the news lately, but apparently the Senate is launching a federal investigation into an earmark that was altered after it was passed by congress but before it was signed by the President. The earmark was originally part of a highway funding bill that was approved for one specific part of a Florida highway and was worth $10 million.

After the bill was approved by Congress, apparently Rep. Don Young (R-AK) changed the wording of the bill to send those $10 million to another part of Florida's interstate, "Coconut Road." His spokesperson said that "It was an error [in the bill]. It was originally supposed to say Coconut Road so he changed it."

Now, with all due respect to Rep. Young, and not even considering the fact that somehow he has enough money or even feels the need to hire his own representative spokesperson (hmm isn't he supposed to be a representative of the people) you can't just go around altering bills after they have been approved by Congress. You might be thinking that its harmless for a Representative to go in and fix an error within a bill, but its really not.

This isn't a matter of fixing a mistake, it's a matter of rules, customs, and what is fundamentally right and wrong. How can a congressman have enough independent authority to alter a bill before it reaches the President without anyone finding out. What if that representative had said "the bill was supposed to say $100 million, so I changed it." That congressman is then assuming that everyone would have voted the same with a $90 million increase, which is patently false. Who knows if this bill would have passed if those voting had known the money was going to "Coconut Road."

In essence this guy was acting as his own Congress. He took something that was passed, re-wrote it, then felt that he had the authority to then re-pass that legislation, all by himself. DUDE! YOU CAN'T DO THAT!

Sorry I had to speak in layman's terms there, but it's just so dumb that this guy could break the rules so blatently, and then not even feel as if he had broken the rules at all. What if someone did that and approved more money to fund the Iraq war, to fund a terrorist organization, to fund the KKK? He thinks he's "fixing" the bill, but I think he's the one that needs the fixing. Eh, whatever, we can't expect all of our representatives to have read the Constitution right?

righhhhttttt (sarcasm)

Heated FISA Debate Leads to Closed Session

The House of Representative has been debating proposed revisions to FISA and other Federal surveillance laws recently. After the 9/11 attacks, President Bush starting using the National Security Agency to track phone calls, emails, and all other types of communication of suspected terrorists outside the United States.

The problem is that the program allows this warrantless wiretapping to take place even if one of the communicating parties lies within the United States. Bush has argued that they aren't spying on the American people, just making sure that the government has intelligence of any suspected terrorist activity. Many are outraged, however, feeling that NSA overstepped its bounds and has violated the 4th Amendment and FISA, the federal surveillance legislation.

Anyways, the debate right now is whether to protect privately contracted communications companies who complied with Bush's wiretapping program from lawsuits by those who feel slighted. The Republicans feel as though the companies should be given "retroactive immunity" but many Democrats think the companies should be open to any type of lawsuit in order to protect the rights of the American people.

The debate has become so heated, that Republican Whip Roy Blunt asked for a closed session of congress to take place on Thursday, March 14th so that confidential information could be presented on the floor. Such a closed session has not taken place since 1983, and it means that the American people will not have any knowledge of what is going on inside the House chamber.

Call me crazy, but I think this might actually be a step in the right direction. How many citizens actually care about what House members are saying on the floor? What people care about is results, and if this closed session can lead to a resolution of the issue, I think people will be satisfied.

It's important that Congress remains connected with the people, but this is an isolated event, and since confidential information needs to be discussed, I really don't see any other option. A few Democrats are opposed to the idea of closing the House on Thursday (cough cough Kucinich) but for the most part, they agree that it needs to take place.

That being said, I'd really like to know what's being said in that historic session. Maybe I could call Bush and ask him to wiretap it for me. He'd probably go along with it. Who cares if it's illegal.

More on this to come as it develops.....

UPDATE!! The Democratic version of the bill passed in congress today. Those who were in the closed session last night are reporting that not much was accomplished in terms of moving towards a workable compromise. President Bush has already promised to veto the legislation, which follows the Democrats idea of not providing immunity to the communications compaines. Even in private, it seems like Washington can't get anything done these days....

Bush Vetoes Anti-Torture Bill

You couldn't make this up if you tried.

Today George Bush vetoed a bill that would prevent the CIA from using interrogation techniques many consider to be torture. One of the methods that the bill would have outlawed, waterboarding, includes strapping the prisoner to a board and pouring vast amounts of water into their breathing passages.

Bush said that the bill "would take away one of the most valuable tools in the war on terror." Really, Mr. President? Torturing foreign suspects is a tool in your war on terror? To hell with the Constitution and morals of this country, right?

Both houses of Congress passed the bill, but as we all know, Bush knows best. We can only hope that Congress overrides the veto, but don't count on it.