( – promoted by Michael Bersin)
Senator McCaskill,
I recently read that the President issued a signing statement rejecting the “Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan” that you and Senator Webb successfully amended into the Defense appropriations bill. It was probably very disconcerting to you that the President could subvert the Constitutional role of Congress in making laws and funding initiatives. I imagine you are as outraged by it as I am.
Now, put yourself in the place of one of the U.S. citizens who has filed suit against one of the telecommunication companies for their violations of the law and privacy agreements by engaging in warrantless wiretapping. You want justice. You want the companies found guilty so that they never do it again. You also want the Administration’s wrongdoing to be exposed to the light of day.
Then you find out that the President, most of the Republican senators and representatives and a handful of Democrats want to grant those same telecom companies retroactive immunity, thereby erasing your rights and your search for justice with the stroke of a pen. You know that this grant of immunity will not keep the telecom companies from breaking the law in the future and that it will allow the Administration to hide their lawbreaking.
Wouldn’t you feel the same outrage? Then, how can you in good conscience support telecom immunity? (By the way, the Specter amendment IS telecom immunity).
Sprint and AT&T did not send you to Washington D.C. – we did. We, the people of Missouri, sent you because you promised to bring ACCOUNTABILITY. How does the grant of immunity bring accountability to the telecoms and the Bush Administration?
President Bush and Vice President Cheney think that Congress and by extension, the American people are irrelevant. They show their contempt for us every time they issue a signing statement trying to nullify legislation. They show their contempt for us every time they chip away at our civil liberties. They show their contempt for us every time they try to jawbone Congress into passing a law that hides their misdeeds.
We are all outraged by the trampling of the Constitution by this Administration. The question is – what are YOU going to do about it?
You can start by voting to strip telecom immunity from the pending FISA legislation (S. 3907) and to tighten the existing law by adding in minimization, sequestration and sunset provisions (S. 3912, 3913, 3915, 3920, 3930, 3910) and by voting against Senator Bond’s attempts to broaden the Administration’s spying powers (S. 3938 and 3941).
It is time to do the job that we sent you to do.
Sincerely,
Your Constituent
for summarizing all the pending legislation by number. Makes so much easier send emails to Senators. Telecom immunity is a big deal, but not really bigger than the relatively unfettered spying that the Intelligence Committee Bill would offer (the so-called bucket or blanket warrents).
A few days ago I had the chance to speak with an activist acquaintance in passing. We spoke about the primary and who we supported. I then mentioned I wasn’t exactly happy with Claire McCaskill. The other individual replied, “Oh, because of her endorsement of Obama?” I replied, “Actually, no. I don’t particularly care who she endorses in a primary. That’s political life. I’m not happy because of telecom immunity in the FISA bill.” The response, “What’s that?” I explained at length.
Another political activist friend told me in a phone conversation, “If Claire McCaskill thinks that republicans are going to man the phone banks and go door to door for her in 2012 she’s got another thing coming to her…[as an activist Democrat] I certainly won’t.”
I told Claire McCaskill’s aide when I called Washington about this stuff: “If Senator McCaskill doesn’t make this right I will sit on my hands come her next election…”
…in which he delivered a stirring defense of the Constitution–right in front of Claire McCaskill.
I hope she got the message.
Andy
Good point Willy. The telecom immunity provision is the one that gets most of the focus, but you’re right – there are other other things in the SSCI version of the bill that are bad (basket warrants and lack of minimization procedures).
The following sites have links to all of the amendments and some discussion on them:
http://cboldt.blogspot.com/200…
http://www.boomantribune.com/s…
Well good luck getting her to pay attention. She is too busy gushing over Obama! It embarrasses me as a women. I have been disappointed in her since she went to D.C for being part of that group of Democrats who have continued to enable George Bush to continue his war. I am a Hillary supporter unlike I gather a number of the writers on this blog. My two main reasons are that I want a Democrat in the White House and because I believe contrary to popular opinion that she has helped many people throughout her career.
What are people thinking? Obama has gotten a complete pass from the press.Do you think that will continue once the Republican attack dogs are released. The press loves McCain and so do independents who lean consertative. They are flirting with Obama now but once things really get tough they won’t hold. Remember Bill Clinton was once the candidate of hope..before he got to Washington and they started in on him. People want hope and inspiration but in this economy they aren’t going to be able to feed the family on it.The people who are so carried away by Obama have little to lose if everything goes sour, they are the well to do and the young, still being supported by Mom and Dad.I am guessing that is why Edwards is holding off making an endorsement. He is a fighter and he knows Hillary is too. Does anybody think we will get universal healthcare starting negotiations with 15 million people left out?