Our friends at Fired Up reminded us that there’s a wingnut fest in St. Louis this weekend. We thought we’d take a look at the agenda and save everyone the time and the price of admission:

How to stop abortions: a new approach

Uh, elect republican majorities in the House and Senate and a republican President then stand around while they loot the treasury and enrich their cronies as they ignore the people they mobilized with their wedge politics strategery. Oh, wait, you said “a new approach.”

How to counter the homosexual extremist movement

Secede from the Union?

How to deal with global warming, cap and trade

Problem. Solution. No problem.

How to use New Media technology

Gingerly, with a top down strict hierarchical structure. We guarantee that this will encourage originality and innovation.

How to stop the entry of illegal aliens and drugs

That’s a tough one. Let’s ask shadow president John McCain when he’s on Meet the Press.

How to stop government attacks on parents’ rights

That’s easy. Don’t have kids.

How to deal with supremacist judges

Don’t live in Alabama so you don’t have to vote for them?

How Conservatives Can Use Media to Advance Our Cause

Buy your own cable new network. Oh, wait…

How to stop socialism in health care

Get rid of our military, the Veterans Administration, and Medicare.

How to defeat attacks on sovereignty by UN treaties

Buy your own fleet of black helicopters and fly them around in random places to confuse everybody.

How to activate your church

Enter the ten digit code that’s printed on the inside of the CD cover.

How to use the Internet effectively

1. Possess critical thinking skills. 2. Chant “facts are our friends, facts are our friends, facts are out friends.” 3. Lather. 4. Rinse. 5. Repeat.

How to deal with vote fraud, the Census, and ACORN

Defund the military industrial complex?

How to defend America vs. missile attack

Duck and cover.

How to lobby legislators

Roy Blunt (r – lobbyists) knows how that works!

How to bring youth into the conservative movement

Eviscerate funding for public education.

How to understand Islam

If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em?

How to defend traditional marriage and DOMA

Don’t elect any republicans who’ve been divorced or hang out in airport bathroom stalls?

How the media can help us take back America

Tell Drudge and the rest of them will repeat it.

How to lobby federal legislation & policy

Ask Roy Blunt (r – lobbyists), he knows!

How to defeat Con Con, National Popular Vote, ERA

The same way we did with fluoridation?

How to recognize living under Nazis & Communists

Is it their brown shirts or the forced attendance for presidential addresses in our schools?

How to stop feminist and gay attacks on the military

Give a corporation [a] cost plus two hundred billion dollar contract to buy them all off?

How conservatives can win in 2010

Keep on doing what you’re doing now. Please.

I recently wrote to Claire McCaskill to ask her to support a strong public option in the pending health care reform legislation; I was not too surprised when she responded with a one size fits all form letter which was clearly intended to reassure everyone from teapartier to progressive that good old Mom has their best interests at heart.  I didn’t even hold it against her at the time – I have learned that she is nothing if not cautious.

McCaskill was remarkably careful to avoid specifics in her response – particularly in regard to anything controversial like the public option.  How, for example, would you interpret this declaration which was the most substantive part of her letter?

There are still many tough issues to resolve in the health care debate, including insurance coverage mandates, whether a public program will compete with private insurers, and how to pay for it.  I welcomed the President’s speech to Congress which outlined his view of how Congress should resolve the health care reform debate and offered room for compromise and pragmatism.  … the highest priorities for Congress and health industry leaders remain protecting patient choice of care, curbing skyrocketing health costs, and expanding coverage for the uninsured. [Italics added]

If you can figure out what this boilerplate says about where Cagey McCaskill comes down on the important details, you are better than I at interpreting subtext.  Of course, the fact that  she now speaks for “health industry leaders” might be a clue.

The most ominous note, however, was the closing which summoned up what I had assumed to be the entirely discredited spectre of bipartisanship:

I look forward to working with my colleagues in a bipartisan fashion to find a fiscally responsible solution for the health of Americans and our nation’s economy …

Not a good sign.  McCaskill always bangs the fiscally responsible drum, which is not necessarily a bad schtick, but, bipartisanship? How many times can the Republicans kick these fools in the behind anyway?

Turns out as many times as they want. And this is what makes me so retroactively angry about the pablum in McCaskill’s form letter: Today I learn that she has become a charter member of a brand spanking new bipartisan “gang,” as if it weren’t bad enough that Max Baucus and his gangsters wasted weeks trying to give the shop away to Republicans – who never once stopped turning up their noses at all this socialism run amok.  

Really all you need to know about this new group is that many of the other members are prominent among the regular cast of Democratic quislings, e.g., Joe Lieberman, Mary Landrieu and Ben Nelson. And lest you think I am condemning their efforts prematurely, it seems that one of the reasons it was formed is that the members are really worried that Harry Reid and other congressional Democrats might show some backbone:

Group members have grown more alarmed at the prospect of Democratic leaders using a procedural maneuver [i.e. reconciliation] to push healthcare reform through the Senate with a simple majority.

Somebody ought to tell McCaskill that bipartisan in this day and age and in the context of health care is code for stupid or industry shill – just in case she doesn’t already know.

Tommy Sowers, announced Democratic Party candidate for the seat in the 8th Congressional District, spoke at the Truman Day rally in Poplar Bluff on Saturday, September 19th.

Our previous coverage of Tommy Sowers’ campaign:

Tommy Sowers (D) is running against Jo Ann Emerson (r) in the 8th Congressional District

…[applause] Good evening everyone. Thank you for that excellent introduction. And it’s an honor to be standing before you tonight. Especially on a night celebrating Harry S Truman. Some of my first memories were sitting on my grandfather’s lap in the newspaper editorial office looking at pictures of him and Harry S Truman. And when I think of what it means to be a public servant I think of him. I think of a guy that’s from the area. I think of a guy that served his country and always put the people first. So it’s an honor to be with, with you here tonight on this night.

You may have heard that I’m running for Congress. You may have seen it in the newspaper or heard it on the radio. But tonight I’ve got a very simple thing to do, a mission, for a military man. I need to tell you who I am and I need, need to tell you why I’m running….

…So first off, who I am. I’m a native. I was born and raised in Rolla, Missouri, I was schooled there, and generations of my family have lived there and still live there today. I’m a soldier and a veteran. For eleven years, I started off as a combat engineer getting trained up at Fort Leonard Wood, learning how to build stuff and then blow things up. Then I went to Iraq. I was a Green Beret, Special Forces and Ranger. And I had the opportunity to serve there with the finest men and women in uniform. I also had the opportunity to meet one of those women in uniform, which is my fiance, [inaudible][applause]. Baghdad is not where you expect you’re gonna meet your wife. [laughter]

I’m also an educator. My last assignment in the military was being a professor at the United States Military Academy. And now I teach up, up at what used to be UMR, before that the School of Mines, and it’s now the Missouri University of Science and Tech. I teach American government and politics. I teach the Constitution. I teach what the founders wanted Congress to do. Even though, when we watch the news, that’s not exactly what’s going on. It’s a tough challenge to teach that.

I’m a Democrat. It was one of those key things that I learned in the military. The Special Forces motto is de oppresso liber, which is “to free the oppressed”. And to look out and protect those that need the most protection. That to me is one of the core messages of the Democratic Party.

And finally, I was asked to do this. A couple years back I was at West Point and I got a call from some folks back home who asked me to leave the military, to leave the soldiers and the career that I loved, to come back here. And I looked and, and examined this race. I looked and examined the record. And I found out some stuff that I didn’t know. That we are one of the poorest districts in America. Tenth poorest. And if you’re a woman, you can do no worse. We’re ranked four thirty-five out of four thirty-five. That twenty-five percent of the kids live underneath the poverty line. That is unacceptable. And I knew then that I needed to come home and fight for my home.

As for why I’m running, we’ve got a very simple message. And I heard it tonight, I heard it two years ago, and I hear it everywhere I go as I travel around this district. It’s a simple statement. We can do better. [applause]

What do I mean by this? People tell me we can expect [inaudible] leadership. You all know what it means to be held accountable. You’re accountable to your family, to your business, to your church, to your employees and employers. In the military I lived accountability. I lived it every day. And I still remember my first company commander, I asked him, “Hey, sir, what am I accountable for here?” he said, “Hey LT, it’s simple, everything that your platoon does and everything that they fail to do.” That was accountability.

Now why should we expect anything different from our members of Congress and Jo Ann Emerson? In the last twelve years, in this district we’ve seen thousands of jobs lost. We’ve seen factories close down. We’ve seen homes foreclosed. But Congress, and Jo Ann Emerson, doesn’t want to be accountable for that

In the last twelve years we’ve watched the biggest surplus in history vanish and turn into the largest deficit in history. And Congress and Jo Ann Emerson do not want to be accountable for that. And now here we are in the midst of the greatest economic crisis since the great depression. Jo Ann Emerson had a seat at that table and instead of protecting us from Wall Street greed, she voted to bail them out. They want one more bailout for themselves. They want us to bail them out at the ballot box. Ladies and gentlemen, Jo Ann Emerson’s free ride ends now. [applause] The buck stops tonight.

You also talk in terms of better representation. Jo Ann Emerson wasn’t born here. She was born in D.C. She wasn’t raised here, she was raised in D.C. She wasn’t schooled here, she doesn’t live here. And fourteen months from now, in November of Twenty Ten when we beat her, she sure as heck isn’t moving back here. [laughter][applause]

We can do better. What can we do? We need a representative that is gonna fight for the small towns, the small communities, the small farms that populate this district. And not be funded by the big interests that fuel Jo Ann Emerson’s campaign. We’ve got some of the hardest working people in this district. I, I was raised with them, I know ’em, they’re in my blood. And they need someone who’s gonna fight for them. And fight for the level playing field and the key infrastructure that we need in order to compete. We can do better.

Now, I know I’m looking out over the loyal foot soldiers of the Democratic Party. You have seen many candidates come and try to take on this incredible machine. Now is the year.

What you’ve got in me is a fighter. I’ve been tossed in many situations where said, frankly, “You’re not getting through this.” And I know how to assemble the right team, get the right resources. We’ve got that team here. I’m getting advised by some of the, the greatest minds here. I can’t wait to, to pick these gentlemen’s brains. We’ve got and we’re assembling the resources so that we can have a fair fight. And over the next couple months you’re gonna see this campaign run.

We can do better. The final word is the key one. We. We. I need all of you. I need you on the team. I need your ideas. I need your passion. I need your resources. And it can start here tonight. If I haven’t met you tonight I want to meet you. Come up and introduce yourself to… we’ve got…he’ll sign you up tonight. We will build out the team that we need.

Talk to your friends. Let’s, let’s grow this party in this district. Let’s bring some of these folks back into the Democratic Party, the party that deserves to be representing this district. Join our team.

Now, this year, is the time. We can and we must do better.

Thank you very much. [applause]

Here’s the dilemma when progressives schedule a demonstration against an offending corporation: it needs to be during business hours–which is when most of the people who’d like to turn out for the demonstration are working. So the rally to protest the business practices of WellPoint and its subsidiary Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield wasn’t huge. The rally goers–maybe 100 of them–gathered in a small park between the streets that front Union Station and the Blue Cross Blue Shield offices.

They listened to a couple of people preaching the gospel of “Health care is a right, not a privilege” and to a couple of women, Melanie Shouse and Rebecca Tobias, describing how their health insurer, located a few hundred feet away in that big building across Chestnut Street, had screwed them. Between speakers, various cheerleaders with mics or bullhorns got antiphonal chants going: “What do we want? Health Care! When do we want it? Now!” and “Big insurance? Sick of it! Big insurance? Sick of it!” One salty woman with a bullhorn complained about the Blue Dog Democrats resisting the public option by calling them “neutered Democrats, who need to grow a pair”.

Finally, the group sent a small delegation consisting of the Rev. Mary Albert, who had spoken earlier, and the two women who had suffered at the hands of Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield to hand deliver a petition asking the company, among other things, to stop a program that rewards  employees according to the number of claims they deny.

Most often, corporate representatives politely accept papers symbolizing a protest, but not on Tuesday. The two men, looking like Easter Island statues in suits, stood on the front steps of the building with three police officers and refused to take the paper that Albert tried to hand them.

Silly really. All they had to do was go back inside and stash it in the nearest circular file. But no.

So within five minutes, much of the crowd had gathered in front of the steps chanting, “What do we want? Health care! When do we want it? Now! What do we need? Health care! When do we need it? Now!” After a few minutes of that, the company reps relented and allowed one, just one, of the three women to approach–had to make that little power play, don’t you know. They were fuming at being challenged by the peons.

The video shows the three women descending the steps after being turned away. Then it jumps to the crowd chanting and finally shows Albert going up the steps to hand over the paper.

Thanks to Jo Mannies at the Beacon we have the company’s official rationalization for its behavior.

Anthem said in a statement that the demonstration wasn’t the best way to promote “constructive dialogue.”

“As was made clear by news reports throughout the weekend, the demonstrations were not a spontaneous reaction by Americans to the health-care reform debate, but instead were part of a heavily scripted campaign with pre-approved talking points, slogans and tactics,” the Anthem statement said.

Aside from the fact that two of Tuesday’s speakers denied the “scripted” charge in the comments section of the Beacon article (Here’s an excerpt: “I told a very private and painful story for the first time EVER of how our family finances were decimated, and my child’s health and well-being placed at life threatening risk by a concerted denial of care by our health insurance carrier.”), let me point out that the big insurance companies ought to recognize the difference between a heartfelt tale of woe at the hands of greedy profiteers and an actual “heavily scripted campaign”:

Earlier this week, the Wall Street Journal reported that AHIP – the multimillion dollar lobbying juggernaut for the health insurance industry – has mobilized 50,000 employees to lobby Congress to defeat the public option. ThinkProgress has learned that AHIP’s grassroots lobbying is being managed by the corporate consulting firm Democracy Data & Communications. DDC has made a name for itself as one of the most effective stealth lobbying firms. Earlier this summer, DDC was caught by reporters using a front group called “Citizens for a Safe Alexandria” to attack the Obama administration for seeking to prosecute Guantanamo Bay prisoners in Alexandria, VA.

So Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield, ignoring the irony of their spokeshole calling our demonstration “heavily scripted” and pretending that they were interested in “constructive dialogue”, offered further misdirection by explaining its opposition to the public option. Turns out that the objection has nothing to do with the fact that the government entity wouldn’t be taking exorbitant profits and thus would challenge the easy billions health insurers currently rake in. Not at all.

The insurer blamed the federal government for much of the nation’s current health coverage issues. “Put simply, those covered by private insurance are already paying a premium to account for the cost-shifting which occurs today as a result of government programs setting artificially low reimbursement rates that are below the cost of doing business for hospitals and physicians. A government-run program will most certainly exacerbate this cost shift and ultimately result in decreased funding for doctors and hospitals and less choice for Americans.”

Correct me if I’ve failed to follow their tortuous reasoning, but we’re going broke on premiums because the federal government doesn’t pay doctors enough for treating Medicare and Medicaid patients. That in turn causes cost shifting. Doctors and hospitals charge other patients more to make up for their losses in treating Medicare patients.

There may be some cost shifting going on, for all I know. What I know for certain is that profits for the top ten health insurers rose from $2.4 billion in 2000 to $12.4 billion in 2007. Their profits quintupled in seven years. The real cost shifting is the cash going from our wallets into those of  stockholders and CEOs.

Maybe some of the people reading The Beacon will be impressed with the line of malarkey Blue Cross spouted. Readers here, though, hardly need to be told that these silver tongued bastards are salivating at the thought of all those millions of mandated new customers without any competition from the government to bring down the premiums.

So. The rally is over. Time to get on the horn to Claire and stress again the need for a public option.

Brilliant, actually:

Whoops: Anti-ACORN Bill Ropes In Defense Contractors, Others Charged With Fraud

Going after ACORN may be like shooting fish in a barrel lately — but jumpy lawmakers used a bazooka to do it last week and may have blown up some of their longtime allies in the process.

The congressional legislation intended to defund ACORN, passed with broad bipartisan support, is written so broadly that it applies to “any organization” that has been charged with breaking federal or state election laws, lobbying disclosure laws, campaign finance laws or filing fraudulent paperwork with any federal or state agency. It also applies to any of the employees, contractors or other folks affiliated with a group charged with any of those things.

In other words, the bill could plausibly defund the entire military-industrial complex. Whoops…

Update: (via Digby)

…Congressman [Alan] Grayson [D – Florida] is reaching out to the netroots for help with this as well:

The House of Representatives just passed a law to prohibit Federal funds from going to organizations that commit fraud against the government, in the form of Section 2 of the ‘Defund ACORN Act’ (link). Congress has five days to put down a legislative history around this bill to help judges and lawyers interpret the law. This gives us an opportunity to make an impact with a deadline of this Friday (9/25). You see, regardless of what you think of ACORN, it is laudable to stop taxpayer money from going to organizations that commit fraud against the government. So as per the bill’s text, I’m going to put into the Congressional record a list of organizations who have committed fraud against the government or employs anyone who has.

Now, I’m just one person, and I can’t possibly find and list all of the organizations that fit this bill. So I need your help. Please nominate organizations and show me that they need to be in the record. To help, send me the name of the organization and proof in the form of a link to evidence that this organization should be in the Congressional record. I will also need your email address so I can follow-up with you if necessary. The proof you send needs to be easily verifiable, as in credible media reports, legal documents, government data, or otherwise.

An example might work as follows. Let’s say that you were nominating ‘Blackwater,’ the controversial mercenary outfit which showed fraud in its contracts for Iraq in 2005. You could include a link like this one

This link is to a credible news organization which sources its information with easily verifiable documents. You could also link directly to source documents.

You can see the current unverified list here

To nominate an organization, please go here to fill out a simple form…

Go. Read the list. (And the link to Congressman Grayson’s original request.)

Update II: I called Congressman Grayson’s office in Washington to confirm that he is indeed soliciting this information. He is.

[end update]

The bill:

Defund ACORN Act (Introduced in House)

HR 3571 IH

111th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 3571

To prohibit the Federal Government from awarding contracts, grants, or other agreements to, providing any other Federal funds to, or engaging in activities that promote certain indicted organizations.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

September 15, 2009

Mr. BOEHNER (for himself, Mr. CANTOR, Mr. PENCE, Mr. ISSA, Mr. ADERHOLT, Mr. AKIN, Mr. ALEXANDER, Mrs. BACHMANN, Mr. BACHUS, Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina, Mr. BARTLETT, Mr. BILIRAKIS, Mr. BISHOP of Utah, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. BLUNT, Mr. BONNER, Mrs. BONO MACK, Mr. BOOZMAN, Mr. BOUSTANY, Mr. BRADY of Texas, Mr. BROUN of Georgia, Mr. BROWN of South Carolina, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. BUYER, Mr. CALVERT, Mr. CAMP, Mrs. CAPITO, Mr. CARTER, Mr. CHAFFETZ, Mr. COFFMAN of Colorado, Mr. COLE, Mr. CONAWAY, Mr. CULBERSON, Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky, Mr. DENT, Mr. DREIER, Mr. DUNCAN, Mr. EHLERS, Ms. FALLIN, Ms. FOXX, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. GALLEGLY, Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey, Mr. GERLACH, Mr. GOODLATTE, Ms. GRANGER, Mr. GRAVES, Mr. HARPER, Mr. HELLER, Mr. HENSARLING, Mr. HERGER, Mr. INGLIS, Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. JONES, Mr. JORDAN of Ohio, Mr. KING of New York, Mr. KINGSTON, Mr. KLINE of Minnesota, Mr. LAMBORN, Mr. LANCE, Mr. LATOURETTE, Mr. LATTA, Mr. LEE of New York, Mr. LEWIS of California, Mr. LINDER, Mr. LOBIONDO, Mr. LUETKEMEYER, Mrs. LUMMIS, Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California, Mr. MACK, Mr. MARCHANT, Mr. MCCAUL, Mr. MCCARTHY of California, Mr. MCCOTTER, Mrs. MCMORRIS RODGERS, Mr. MCHENRY, Mr. MCKEON, Mr. MILLER of Florida, Mrs. MILLER of Michigan, Mr. MORAN of Kansas, Mrs. MYRICK, Mr. NEUGEBAUER, Mr. OLSON, Mr. PAUL, Mr. PETRI, Mr. PLATTS, Mr. POSEY, Mr. PUTNAM, Mr. RADANOVICH, Mr. ROGERS of Alabama, Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky, Mr. ROSKAM, Mr. ROYCE, Mr. SCALISE, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. SHIMKUS, Mr. SHUSTER, Mr. SIMPSON, Mr. SMITH of Texas, Mr. SOUDER, Mr. SULLIVAN, Mr. TERRY, Mr. TIBERI, Mr. TIAHRT, Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania, Mr. TURNER, Mr. UPTON, Mr. WALDEN, Mr. WAMP, Mr. WESTMORELAND, Mr. WHITFIELD, Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, Mr. WOLF, Mr. YOUNG of Florida, and Mrs. BIGGERT) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

A BILL

To prohibit the Federal Government from awarding contracts, grants, or other agreements to, providing any other Federal funds to, or engaging in activities that promote certain indicted organizations.

     Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

     This Act may be cited as the `Defund ACORN Act’.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITIONS ON FEDERAL FUNDS AND OTHER ACTIVITIES WITH RESPECT TO CERTAIN INDICTED ORGANIZATIONS.

     (a) Prohibitions- With respect to any covered organization, the following prohibitions apply:

           (1) No Federal contract, grant, cooperative agreement, or any other form of agreement (including a memorandum of understanding) may be awarded to or entered into with the organization.

           (2) No Federal funds in any other form may be provided to the organization.

           (3) No Federal employee or contractor may promote in any way (including recommending to a person or referring to a person for any purpose) the organization.

     (b) Covered Organization- In this section, the term `covered organization’ means any of the following:

           (1) Any organization that has been indicted for a violation under any Federal or State law governing the financing of a campaign for election for public office or any law governing the administration of an election for public office, including a law relating to voter registration.

           (2) Any organization that had its State corporate charter terminated due to its failure to comply with Federal or State lobbying disclosure requirements.

           (3) Any org
anization that has filed a fraudulent form with any Federal or State regulatory agency.

           (4) Any organization that–

                 (A) employs any applicable individual, in a permanent or temporary capacity;

                 (B) has under contract or retains any applicable individual; or

                 (C) has any applicable individual acting on the organization’s behalf or with the express or apparent authority of the organization.

     (c) Additional Definitions- In this section:

           (1) The term `organization’ includes the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (in this subsection referred to as `ACORN’ ) and any ACORN -related affiliate.

           (2) The term `ACORN -related affiliate’ means any of the following:

                 (A) Any State chapter of ACORN registered with the Secretary of State’s office in that State.

                 (B) Any organization that shares directors, employees, or independent contractors with ACORN .

                 (C) Any organization that has a financial stake in ACORN .

                 (D) Any organization whose finances, whether federally funded, donor-funded, or raised through organizational goods and services, are shared or controlled by ACORN .

           (3) The term `applicable individual’ means an individual who has been indicted for a violation under Federal or State law relating to an election for Federal or State office.

     (d) Revision of Federal Acquisition Regulation- The Federal Acquisition Regulation shall be revised to carry out the provisions of this Act relating to contracts.

The bill names ACORN specifically, and punishes the organization via legislation. That would be a bill of attainder.

United States Constitution

Article I, Section 9.

…No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed…

United States v. Lovett, 328 U.S. 303 (1946)

…[L]egislative acts, no matter what their form, that apply either to named individuals or to easily ascertainable members of a group in such a way as to inflict punishment on them without a judicial trial are bills of attainder prohibited by the Constitution…

United States v. Brown, 381 U.S. 437 (1965)

…While history thus provides some guidelines, the wide variation in form, purpose and effect of ante-Constitution bills of attainder indicates that the proper scope of the Bill of Attainder Clause, and its relevance to contemporary problems, must ultimately be sought by attempting to discern the reasons for its inclusion in the Constitution, and the evils it was designed to eliminate. The best available evidence, the writings of the architects of our constitutional system, indicates that the Bill of Attainder Clause was intended not as a narrow, technical (and therefore soon to be outmoded) prohibition, but rather as an implementation of the separation of powers, a general safeguard against legislative exercise of the judicial function, or more simply – trial by legislature…

And the bill includes language that may preclude federal funds from going to “[a]ny organization that has filed a fraudulent form with any Federal or State regulatory agency.” That could include a number of defense contractors.

Perfect. Just freakin’ brilliant. It’s the stateroom scene from A Night at the Opera directed by Glenn Beck. Without the intentional humor.

It could take a while to sort this one out.

Update: And it’s getting really interesting.

If you’re a Missouri Republican, that is. Rep. Tim Jones is still fighting the good fight alongside Plutonians Orly Taitz and Rep. Cynthia Davis. But he’s unopposed in his bid for Missouri House Republican Floor Leader, and Rex Sinquefield just dropped $40K into Jones’ campaign coffers.

Sometimes it pays to be fringe.

So far Claire McCaskill has shown herself to be a big talker who rarely delivers when it comes to the progressive base that worked hard to elect her.  With action expected imminently on the Murkowski amendment to the Interior Appropriations bill, she will get one more chance to show us why we should support her in the future.

Make no mistake, the Murkowski amendment is very important.  It would exempt carbon dioxide from sources other than cars from the rules that govern pollutants, blocking the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating carbon dioxide from  non-automotive sources. This is kind of like saying that when a thug shoots you with a bullet fired from battle rifle it’s a criminal act, but if the same thug shoots you with a bullet fired from a sniper rifle it’s nothing to worry about.

The amendment would also hamstring the transition to clean energy that the  American Clean Energy and Security (ACES) act aims to jump start.  Its provisions would effectively prohibit the EPA from doing its job and employing appropriate expertise to collect data about dangerous pollutants. If, as President Obama stated in his U.N. speech, “the United States is determined to act” to ameliorate global warming, the Murkowski amendment is absolutely the wrong way to go.

Since this amendment extends a generous helping hand to big oil along with other big corporate polluters, it is easy to see why Alaska’s Murkowski is putting it out there.  Unfortunately, it also shows lots of love to the coal industry —  which McCaskill seems to want to appease in the worst way (note her past statements on ACES).  And indeed, when I called her office yesterday to ask that she help vote down this dangerous corporate giveaway, the staff member I spoke with was noncommittal and very cautious when speaking about her position.

If you agree that McCaskill needs to put the health and long-term well-being of Missourians as a whole above the short-term well-being of the coal industry, give her a call and let her know  how important you think a no vote on the Murkowski amendment really is.  Don’t forget to let her know that you really want to continue to support her and help keep her in Washington, but she has to  do her part first.  

You can reach her Washington Office  at (202) 224-6154.  Check her Web page for numbers at her other offices.