Category: Congress

Federal Court Slams Justice Department Over Obama Comments

Yesterday, we discussed President Obama’s comments on the Supreme Court and the pending health care litigation — comments I viewed as unwise and unfounded. In addition to wrongly suggesting that any justice voting against the law would be a judicial activist, Obama seemed to suggest that the law should be upheld on the ground that it is the result of a democratic process and the will of the majority. Putting aside the fact that all unconstitutional law were passed by a democratic process in this country, I noted that the comments were extremely unwise at a time when the Court appears split on the key issues and currently deliberating the outcome. Well, the Supreme Court is not the only court considering the health care law and the timing could not have been worse for Obama to hold forth on his view of the courts and the Constitution. While I do not agree with the order of the Fifth Circuit for the Administration to respond in writing to the court, some backlash should have been foreseen by the President in going public with the comments.

Continue reading “Federal Court Slams Justice Department Over Obama Comments”

Obama Predicts Health Care Victory, Labels Vote Against Law As “Judicial Activism”

Yesterday, President Barack Obama made the surprising prediction that the Supreme Court would uphold the health care law and further labeled those who would vote against it as judicial activists. I am not sure what he is basing his prediction on, but the comment on judicial activism is both unfounded and unwise.

Continue reading “Obama Predicts Health Care Victory, Labels Vote Against Law As “Judicial Activism””

A Small Victory Against Corporatism

by Gene Howington, Guest Blogger

On Friday, a small victory was had against the ever encroaching corporatism threatening our democracy.  Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D – MD) brought suit against the FEC last year. In his suit, Van Hollen charges that in 2007 the FEC created a loophole allowing undisclosed donors to contribute money for “electioneering communications” to organizations like Karl Rove’s 501(c)(4) advocacy group Crossroads GPS and to 501(c)(6) business associations like the Chamber of Commerce for the purposes of by willfully misinterpreting disclosure requirements in the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (a.k.a. McCain-Feingold). “Electioneering communications”  are broadcast ads that refer to a federal candidate in the period 60 days before a general election or 30 days before a primary election.  These ads may call for either the election or defeat of a specific candidates.

In 2007, the FEC added a regulation that complicated the situation. The rule in question – C.F.R. Title 11 § 104.20 (c)(9) – (found at 2 U.S.C. 434(f)) – says “If the disbursements were made by a corporation or labor organization pursuant to 11 CFR 114.15, the name and address of each person who made a donation aggregating $1,000 or more to the corporation or labor organization, aggregating since the first day of the preceding calendar year, which was made for the purpose of furthering electioneering communications.”  Clearly the FEC is saying that disclosure is only required if a donation is explicitly made “for the purpose of electioneering communication.”  Being that few, if any, donors to these groups ever earmark their donation for a specific election expense there has been little or no disclosure of the donors to these groups.

There is a problem with that regulation though.

Continue reading “A Small Victory Against Corporatism”

Defending Our Freedoms?

Submitted by: Mike Spindell, Guest Blogger

A recurring meme used in American society by leaders and politicians is that certain acts must be done to “Defend Our Freedoms”. The use of this meme has occurred repeatedly in our history as a justification for certain governmental actions, particularly in defense of war. In some cases like our Revolution, or World War II its usage has been right on point, in others like Viet Nam, Iraq and Afghanistan it’s been used as untruthful propaganda. On national and local levels the meme has also had a mixed history. It has been used to persecute radicals, as a States Rights justification of “Jim Crow” and post 9/11 to enact “security” legislation that many of us think actually diminishes freedom in the name of saving it. Continue reading “Defending Our Freedoms?”

Divided on Division? Supreme Court Justices Seem Split on Health Care’s Severability Claim

Some of the Supreme Court appear skeptical of the claim that, if they strike down the individual mandate provision, they must strike down the entirety of the Act. Early accounts of the justices from the courtroom appeared to be favoring severability but new reports have cast doubt — yet another example how artificial the denial of cameras and live coverage has become. As the argument unfolded, conservative justices appear to suggest that it really is an all-or-nothing proposition.

Continue reading “Divided on Division? Supreme Court Justices Seem Split on Health Care’s Severability Claim”

Key Supreme Court Justices Express Skepticism Over Constitutionality Of Health Care Law

It appears that the Supreme Court justices did not hear about the results of the GW Supreme Court deliberations. Key conservative justices expressed notably skepticism about the constitutionality of the health care law. The statements of Roberts and Kennedy are particularly interesting. I will also note that the continued refusal of these justices to allow cameras into the courtroom is indefensible and insulting. The fact that millions of Americans have to wait for individuals to offer second-hand accounts is a ridiculous exercise that, I believe, would have been viewed as positively moronic by the Framers.

Continue reading “Key Supreme Court Justices Express Skepticism Over Constitutionality Of Health Care Law”

A Court of Two: Supreme Court Takes Up Health Care With Scalia and Kennedy In The Spotlight

This week, the Supreme Court will take up its historic three-day consideration of the health care law. My Supreme Court class will be spending two weeks on the four insular issues before the Court, including the question of federalism.

Continue reading “A Court of Two: Supreme Court Takes Up Health Care With Scalia and Kennedy In The Spotlight”

House Passes Tort “Reform” Measure That Would Slash Recovery By Medical Malpractice Victims

The House of Representatives has passed a controversial tort reform bill that contains serious flaws that would limit recovery of people harmed or kill by acts of malpractice. H.R. 5, the “Protecting Access to Healthcare Act” would impose a cap of $250,000 that would severely cut the damages of victims and make it far more difficult for such victims to secure contingency counsel. THe bill passed 223 to 181 with seven Democrats joining Republicans to pass the bill.
Continue reading “House Passes Tort “Reform” Measure That Would Slash Recovery By Medical Malpractice Victims”

Two Federal Courts Reach Opposite Results On The Constitutionality Of The New Graphic Cigarette Images

We have been following the constitutional challenges to the new cigarette advertising regulations requiring graphic images on packages. I have been highly critical of those images and agree with the constitutional and policy concerns raised by the regulations. Now we have two decisions — one from the Sixth Circuit and one from the D.C. district court — reaching opposing results on the constitutionality of regulations. The district court decision sets up the possibility of a split in the circuit with the appeal now going to the D.C. Circuit.

Continue reading “Two Federal Courts Reach Opposite Results On The Constitutionality Of The New Graphic Cigarette Images”

How Patriotic is the Patriot Act?

Respectfully submitted by Lawrence Rafferty (rafflaw)-Guest Blogger

When the Patriot Act was signed into law back in 2001, there was significant discussion about and distrust in the broad powers granted to the FBI and other intelligence gathering agencies. I won’t go into the uproar that ensued back then, but I do want to discuss the latest events pertaining to the infamous Section 215 of the Patriot Act.  Section 215 of the Patriot Act is the section that has been dubbed as the “business records” provision of the Act.  In the last few days, two United States Senators reconfirmed their concern over the possible misuse of the broad powers granted to the government in Section 215.  Senator Ron Wyden and Senator Mark Udall have made public their recent letter to Attorney General Holder expressing their grave concerns on just how Section 215 is being interpreted and used to spy on Americans. Continue reading “How Patriotic is the Patriot Act?”

Coming Soon To A Protest Near You . . .

Submitted by Gene Howington, Guest Blogger

It is a truism that most technology is a two-edged sword. Something created with a beneficial use can and (due to human nature) turned into something harmful is the way the scenario usually plays out. There are, of course, exceptions to this rule where the inverse is true and something harmful turns out to have a beneficial application. To illustrate this point, here is the Vortex Gun.

You saw correctly. This is a gun that can fire concentrated blasts of tear gas, pepper spray or any other aerosol agent moving at 90 miles per hour at targets up to 150 feet away.  The “smoke rings” are still moving at 60 miles per hour reaching targets over 90 feet away.  What possible benefit could come from such a weapon? Let’s look at the non-military application of the weapon before jumping the gun (pun fully intended).

Continue reading “Coming Soon To A Protest Near You . . .”

A Real History of the Last Sixty-Two Years?

Submitted by: Mike Spindell, Guest Blogger

Being in my late 60’s and having grown up in a liberal family, politics and history have been always among my greatest interests. Those much younger than I would no doubt list 9/11 as the most traumatizing historical event of their lifetime. While 9/11 of course affected me greatly, no historical event in my life has affected me as much as the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. I believe that it traumatized my generation so extensively that most of us have not been able to fully believe in our country and its government since that tragic day and its aftermath. Most Americans alive today, who were born in 1960, or afterwards, have only second hand accounts of the total turbulence of the 60’s and the trauma experienced by those who lived through it. There is no doubt that 9/11 has traumatized this nation, but initially it drew most of us together, only to have that unity frittered away by the Bush Administration. The 60’s did that for my generation and that trauma led directly to our current political chaos and deep distrust of government as my generation took the reins of political power.

To most people growing up in the 50’s, on its surface America was the land of opportunity. The USA was a great democracy, unparalleled in human history in the prosperity of its citizens and its standing among nations. For many though, there were obvious cracks in this version of the America Myth. If you were a Black American you faced the viciousness of “Jim Crow” in the South and the somewhat more “genteel” racism pervading the rest of the country. People of Spanish speaking heritage also faced the status of second class citizenship. Native American’s were treated just as badly as they had been from the first European landing on these their shores. Women were, with few exceptions, expected to be subservient to male expectations and were uniformly portrayed as being intellectually inferior. Homosexuals were viciously and violently persecuted. And so it went in 1950’s America. Some great white writers like Mailer, Kerouac, Steinbeck and many others were taking on the myth of the America Dream. Africa American writers like Richard Wright, Ralph Ellison and James Baldwin were standing on the shoulders of their predecessors from the Harlem Renaissance, in exposing the oppression Black people faced. There was among many Americans a weariness of the canards of the Eisenhower Administration, the fear based militarism of the Cold War and a recognition that all was not well with a good portion of the population. There was also for many, a hope for purposefulness in their own lives, beyond marriage, house in the suburbs, new car and two kids.

Arriving on the scene, promising to revitalize the country, was JFK, a brilliant speaker, handsome man and charismatic leader. He won a close election against the unlikable Richard Nixon and proceeded to galvanize the nation with the dreams of his New Frontier. JFK also was the source of great enmity among the Washington Establishment. Seen as nouveau riche by the plutocracy, too idealistic and naïve by the Defense, State Departments and CIA, hated by J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI, too “Nigra Friendly” for Southern racists and a threat to the “business as usual” Corporate status quo. He was murdered on a Friday Afternoon in 1963 as my University suspended activities and I sat with friends stunned with grief listening to a car radio and puffing Marlboro’s. That day is etched permanently in my mind and the disturbing events that followed it throughout those turbulent 1960’s forever changed the way I viewed the world. Lee Harvey Oswald was improbably murdered as I watched on TV that Sunday; a flawed Warren Commission Report arrived filled with holes; the murder of Martin Luther King and then Bobby Kennedy; along with the prosecution of a vicious and illegal war; with all this my faith in American Democracy and exceptionalism faded into skeptical disbelief. Life for us ordinary citizens, however, still went on and pleasure, friends, lovers, spouses, families and careers took up most of our time and attention.  Nevertheless I devoured everything I could read about the JFK murder and indeed about the history taking place as I lived my mundane life. Recently a book brought all those strange feelings back to the surface and provided a possible explanation why our world seems so much crazier these days. Continue reading “A Real History of the Last Sixty-Two Years?”

Pornographic Politics: Santorum Pledges To Prosecute The Country Into a Better Moral State

Rick Santorum is continuing his faith-based campaign with a pledge to wipe out pornography in his Administration. The problem is that pornography is lawful and now a multi-billion dollar industry. It is obscenity that can be criminalized, but what is obscene remains exceptionally vague and ill-defined. Indeed, many may find parts of this presidential campaign to border on the obscene.

Continue reading “Pornographic Politics: Santorum Pledges To Prosecute The Country Into a Better Moral State”

Freeze, U.S. Congress! Rep. King Criticized For Video Of Raid Posted On YouTube

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, is embroiled in another controversy. King has previously been criticized for anti-Muslim statements and his express support for the IRA, despite its listing as a terrorist organization. Now, King has triggered an investigation after he went along with U.S. Marshals on a raid of a home and gleefully filmed the arrest of a citizen, including what appears footage inside the person’s home. It is the perfect merging of entertainment, politics, and crime. In the land of the blind, the one-cameraed man is King.

Continue reading “Freeze, U.S. Congress! Rep. King Criticized For Video Of Raid Posted On YouTube”

Congressional Malpractice

Respectfully submitted by Lawrence Rafferty (rafflaw)-Guest Blogger

It seems that you can’t go anywhere on the Internet and not read an attack on the EPA by a Republican member of Congress. The HillMcClatchey    Unfortunately, I was not surprised how many of the Republican Congressmen were attacking the EPA and its attempts to control and eliminate air pollution.  However, I was surprised by how many of those Congressmen were physicians.

“What would you think if your physician told you, “Keep smoking because quitting would kill tobacco and health care jobs.” Or, “Don’t take your high blood pressure medicine, you can’t afford it.” And, “Don’t lose weight, no one has proven obesity is bad for you.”  That’s exactly the quality of medical advice we are getting from the 18 Republican physicians currently serving in Congress. Some of the most well known are the father and son team of Rep. Ron Paul and Sen. Rand Paul, and Sen. Tom Coburn. Almost all of these physician/Congressmen have been key soldiers in the Republican war on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), calling it a “job killer,” pronouncing relevant health science “unproven,” claiming we “can’t afford” their regulations.”  Truthout  Continue reading “Congressional Malpractice”