...I anguish about the eroding character of the Senate, and the message it sends to the American people, when this body allows itself to be stampeded into passing legislation without thorough examination. We congratulate ourselves on a job well done, and vote overwhelmingly in support of legislation, and yet we cannot even be bothered to ask questions about the changes made in conference. Like pygmies on the battlefield of history, we cower like whipped dogs in the face of political pressure when it comes to issues like intelligence reform.
...
The conference agreement creates senior intelligence positions, but exempts many of them from confirmation by the Senate. It eliminates the privacy and civil rights officers included in the Senate-passed bill, and it strips 18 pages of legislative text that would have created an Inspector General and Ombudsman to oversee the Intelligence Director's office. That language has been replaced with one paragraph, authorizing the Intelligence Director, at his discretion, to create or not to create an Inspector General, and provides the Director with the power to decide which, if any investigative powers, to grant the Inspector General.
That means the new Intelligence Director could exempt his office from Inspector General audits and investigations, and that the Congress would not receive reports from an objective internal auditor. The Congress is limiting its own access to vital information within this new Intelligence Office, and it will have, thereby, compromised an essential mechanism for identifying potential abuses within the new Intelligence Program.
Given the dark history of abuses of civil liberties and privacy rights by our intelligence community, I had hoped that the Congress would exercise more caution, but it has not done so in this legislation.
...
Shame on us for not invoking...wisdom in claiming the additional time we need to better assess this legislation.
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1208-37.htmJim McDermott, my Rep (and my other favorite member of Congress), also opposed this legislation.
snip>
Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., was the only House member to vote "no" in either the Washington or Oregon delegations.
His spokesman, Mike DeCesare, said McDermott was concerned the bill would lead to further erosion of civil liberties.
"Jim's view is that if we had debated this four months ago, things like this could have been worked out," DeCesare said. "Instead this was rushed through at the last minute so a Republican president could claim a victory at the last moment of this Congress. And the security of Americans' freedoms has been watered down tonight."
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/aplocal_story.asp?category=6420&slug=WA%20Congress%20Intelligence%20Gorton&dpfrom=th
'Praise the Lord, we passed the bill,' exclaims Sen. Joe Lieberman (news - web sites), D-Conn., center, with Sen. Susan Collins (news, bio, voting record), R-Maine at left, and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Peter Hoekstra (news, bio, voting record), R-Mich., right, after the Senate voted 89-2 in favor of legislation to overhaul the nation's intelligence structure, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Dec. 8, 2004. Collins and Lieberman led Senate negotiators on the intelligence reform bill and co-authored the original Senate version. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
