How Laws and Appointments Are Being Rammed Through Washington

By R. King, Editor

"Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely," said Lord Acton. With one party controlling the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government, "we the people" are often clueless as the powerful get everything they want...behind our backs.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Acting by decree

When Bush's "Healthy Forests Initiative" met with widespread public skepticism for its give-aways to logging interests and when Congress adjourned in late 2002 without passing his legislation, Bush decided to act by decree, pushing parts of his plan through administratively.¹

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Recess appointments

After Bush's controversial choice of anti-U.N. John Bolton for Ambassador to the U.N. was blocked for five months by Democratic lawmakers, he invoked his constitutional authority to fill the open job while Congress was in recess, instead of trying to resolve the deadlock with Senators who felt Bolton was unfit for the job.²

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Rushing bills to vote without debate

To help ensure passage of controversial bills, the powerful House Rules Committee, contrary to traditional practices, is now routinely restricting floor debate and limiting opportunities for Democratic-sponsored amendments. Sub-committee meetings have been held in basement staff rooms with no numbers on the door, where Democrats can't find them. "In the process, democracy is being dismantled."³

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Gerrymandering

With Tom DeLay and cohorts' self-serving redistricting of Texas recently upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, elections will be more and more rigged. Americans can look forward to less and less real choices, and there will be less and less moderate voices in Congress. That's because candidates won't need to appeal to both sides of the aisle in order to win elections. All that will matter is winning the primary of their party--often accomplished by appealing to the most fanatical elements, such as the 'religious right' with its anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage rhetoric.

The signs of this are already obvious in American political debate today. The ruckus over Teri Schiavvo was a perfect example, as is today's lack of consensus on immigration between the Senate, where members represent an entire state and can serve unlimited terms, and the House, whose members stand for election every two years and can serve a maximum of eight, and have to please the vocal faction that won them their party's support in the first place.

The difference is clearly evident in the immigration debate. In the Senate, Republicans and Democrats alike are taking a long-range view of inclusion, in legislating a path to citizenship for millions of people who have been living here and paying taxes for years. But many of their colleagues in the House act as if they'd be tarred and feathered back home if they took such a view.

In 1964, surrounded by legislators and dignitaries as the cameras flashed, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the historic Civil Rights Act . At such signings, a president uses many pens and gives them to those surrounding him who were involved in the passage of the legislation. It is a special honor to be given the first pen, and most present assumed the first one would go to the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. But LBJ turned and gave the first pen to Senator Everett Dirksen of Illinois. Dirksen was the moderate Republican who helped get enough Republican votes to get the controversial legislation passed. Without Dirksen, LBJ knew, he'd have no Civil Rights Act.

Great laws are hard to pass. They need great people in both houses lifting their minds beyond the next public opinion poll. Without the Everett Dirksens in Washington, consensus will be harder to reach, and great laws will be harder to come by.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

"Nuclear Option"--Threat to end filibuster

Flush with the victory of Bush's reelection, Senate Republicans in early 2005 wanted to eliminate Democratic opposition to controversial judicial nominations and threatened what Senator Bill Frist called the "nuclear option"--eliminating the filibuster. Enacted in the early 1800's as a check against abuse of power by the majority party, the filibuster lets senators debate as long as they like, thereby enabling the minority party to stall a vote it knows it will lose. Originally, a single senator could conduct a filibuster as long as he could keep talking. But current rules make it possible to end it with a vote of 60 senators. Republicans threatened to change the rules so that the Senate would need only a simply majority--51 votes--to end debate. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) argued that barring the filibuster would reduce the Senate to "a rubber stamp for the president. When it comes down to it, stripping away these important checks and balances is about the arrogance of those in power who want to rewrite the rules so that they can have their way," Reid said.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Federal agencies using arcane regulations and legal opinions to shield industries from challenges by consumers and states

Example: A stronger vehicle roof safety standard proposed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration also protects the industry from future roof-crush lawsuits

Example: The highway safety agency, a branch of the Department of Transportation, is backing auto industry efforts to stop California and other states from regulating tailpipe emissions they link to global warming. The agency said last summer that any such rule would be a backdoor attempt by states to encroach on federal authority to set mileage standards, and should be preempted.

Example: The U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency has repeatedly sided with national banks to fend off enforcement of consumer protection laws passed by California, New York and other states. The agency argued that it had sole authority to regulate national banks, preempting state restrictions.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Lobbyist influence

The Republican's K Street Project has established a revolving door between Congress and the people influencing Congress. Votes on appointments are determined by how the individuals will perform for special interests. "Since 1998, at least 79 members of Congress have hired lobbyists to head or act as treasurer of their campaign committees or political action committees.

Lobbyists' contributions to 2004 congressional candidates totaled $22 million--nearly five times as much as a decade earlier. And that figure does not include the substantial amounts that lobbyists persuaded others to give.5

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Earmarking

"Thousands of lobbyists now earn their keep by seeking rifle-shot appropriations for a particular client, rather than lobbying for programs and policies affecting an entire industry or sector," the Los Angeles Times reported. Last year's highway bill alone contained 6,371 projects, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, a watchdog group. By contrast, when President Reagan vetoed a highway bill in 1987, he complained because 152 projects had been inserted, or "earmarked.

"Critics say that earmarks--often inserted into bills at the last minute, without public scrutiny or even notice--are an invitation to corruption because they allow lawmakers to cater to moneyed special interests without accountability.

"According to Taxpayers for Common Sense, the number of firms registered to lobby on budget and appropriations increased from 1,498 in 1998 to 4,013 by mid-2005. Some firms specialized in getting earmarks--the spokesman for the House Appropriations Committee, John Scofield, calls them "earmark factories."6

"Money is choking democracy to death," Bill Moyers says in a fiery, indignant speech about corruption he is delivering across the country. Righteous indignation from sounds good coming from a former Baptist preacher like Moyers. Democrats should try it on for size.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Attempts to Amend the Constitution For Political Gain

Example: Amendment to ban gay marriage (Sponsor: Sen. Bill Frist, Tenn.)

Example: Amendment to change Article II requiring a president to be natural born citizen of the United States (Sponsor: Sen. Hatch, Utah, friend of Cal. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, patron of the state's huge nutritional supplement industry

Example: Proposal to repeal the 22nd Amendment, which would allow Bush to run for a third term (Sponsors: U.S. Representatives Howard Berman (D-Cal.) and James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.)

 

________________________

¹ Sierraclub.org

² Warren Vieth, Los Angeles Times, August 2, 2005

³ Erica Rosenberg, "How the GOP messes up the House," Los Angeles Times, March 19, 2006.
4 Jeffrey H. Friedman, Los Angeles Times, April 6, 2005.

5 Richard Simon and Mary Curtius, Los Angeles Times, March 5, 2006.
6 Janet Hook and Richard Simon, Los Angeles Times, January 29, 2006.

 

© 2006 MostCorrupt.com

 

home