As you may have noticed, Missouri’s 8th district is about to have a special election. Jo Ann Emerson is following up being elected to her 9th term by resigning early and taking a new job. The date of her resignation is up in the air (turns out resigning in February might postpone a special election for way too long) and thus the date of the special election is up in the air, with the hope that the election will be held in April.

So with an impending election, the candidates are popping up. Wendall Bailey emerged from wherever he’s been to run for office on a “I will not seek re-election and allow for a hilarious primary” platform. Speaking of hilarious primaries, Sarah Steelman is also running!.

But there’s one man who stands above the rest. A man not afraid to tweet his mind (at least until he got some people to tell him to stop retweeting embarrassing things). That man is Missouri’s Lt. Governor, Peter Kinder and he is running reports Eli Yokley.

Peter Kinder held a few jobs before beginning his career in elective office in 1993. He was a campaign manager for Bill Emerson. He even worked in Washington DC. But years after coming home from DC, Peter Kinder was an editorial writer for the Southeast Missourian.

For the younger readers who may not remember newspapers or editorial pages. It’s where people would kind of blog. Only without links and within a set amount of space. Some of them even had editors too.

Since the search powers of Google’s newspaper archive are a bit limited (Sadly, Google has deemphasized their newspaper archive in recent years). I feel it would be informative to bring you a look into the Peter Kinder Southeast Missourian files.

It was 1988. Rust Communications had just bought the Southeast Missourian two years earlier* and the Southeast Missourian editorial page was diverse. The editorial page displayed a split between conservative and really conservative. A place where you could peacefully read Pat Buchanan, Joe Sobran, or George Will while grousing over the changes in the times.

(* – Rust Communications now owns 15 newspapers in the 8th Congressional District, with newspapers in Advance/Bloomfield, Cape Girardeau, Caruthersville, Chaffee, Dexter, Doniphan, Kennett, Malden/Campbell, Marble Hill, Poplar Bluff, Portageville, Puxico, Sikeston, Steele, and Thayer)

On right wing editorial pages, 1988 was a year with an extraordinary interest in Jesse Jackson, fading into the fall as they focused on Michael Dukakis’ ACLU army of darkness matching over the countryside. The Peter Kinder column covered those general topics. But he also hit on his notes of importance. Such as editorializing against 8th district Congressional candidate Wayne Cryts (a habit he kept alive for several years after the final Cryts campaign in 1988).

Referring to Cryts’ support by Congressman Lane Evans of Illinois, Kinder declared Evans to be “easily one of the two-dozen most ultra liberal members of Congress”, “as close as you can get in American politics to being an out-and-out socialist without declaring himself as such” and “a male version of Harriett Woods”.

After thwarting Michael Dukakis’ and Lane Evans’ plans to implement the socialist state, Peter the editorializer got to spread his wings and display all the right-wing bombast you could fit into an assigned portion of the Southeast Missourian from Sunday to Friday (never on Saturdays, the Southeast Missourian takes their Saturdays off). It was a time for Peter Kinder to go at all foes in his vicinity. Sure, he would devote a random paragraph to local events from time to time, but in the Kinder column, it was no holds barred.

So now, the very quotable Editorial Kinder (all emphasis’ added):

On Feminists (and anybody he’d categorize as such):

“All the dreadful gasbags who lead the militant Feminist movement were in DC on Sunday, leading 300,000 marchers down Constitution Avenue to try and frighten and intimidate the United States Supreme Court. There was Betty Friedan and Eleanor Smeal; the twin Glorias, Steinem and Allred; Phil Donahue and Jane Fonda, countless other movie stars, and of course the ever-truculent and depressingly masculine Molly (“I am outraged!) Yard, the current president of the National Organization for Women (NOW)”

On the rise in Gender-discrimination based abortions:

“There is growing evidence across the country that couples are increasingly choosing abortion when the gender of the fetus is determined to be female. That’s right: couples are choosing to abort entirely healthy girl babies in order to try again to conceive a male baby”

“Feminists bring a sad hardness to our lives“ (actual column title!)

“The billboard advertises a florist’s business and features a very fine looking pair of women’s legs covered at the top by a mini-skirt. The caption on the board next to the Town and Country Florist’s logo says, “We Have the Best Stems in Town!”

Such a delightfully effective manner of communicating is an unspeakable outrage for some people. It simply cannot be tolerated under any circumstances. Sure enough, the Feminist Thought Police have strapped on their jackboots; that tramp-tramp-tramp you hear is their battalions marching in to express their fury. To the barricades!”

“The bad news is that they’re bringing into St. Louis this weekend the perfectly dreadful Molly Yard, national president of NOW. (Ms. Yard has of course distinguished herself as one of the leading Harpies of our time)”

“The Goddess of Militant Feminist Equality is a harridan, a sterile creature. She is an ugly, shrill and jealous deity, before which the spirit of our age commands us to bow down. She is as crabbed, as dreadfully serious and as narrow as the leveling spirit that animates her desire to control literally every institution in our society. Even ones that do no harm and which don’t need changing.”

“George Patton, meet Congresswoman Pat Schroeder. Stonewall Jackson, meet Bella Abzug. George Marshall, meet Molly Yard and her storm troopers at the National Organization for Women. It’s enough to drive a man to drink“

On Joe Biden, activities of:

Actual column title: Plantation beckons: Who is next for Joe Biden to lynch?

“The Liberal Plantation is headquartered in the Big House up on Capitol Hill. From there the plantation masters – Senators such as Massa Kennedy, Massa Biden and Massa Metzenbaum – control their subjects”

“The slavery that existed under force of law during the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries was America’s shame, to be sure. Its legacy still hurts, and hurts badly. Still, that tragic legacy could hardly be more degrading than the state of dependency foisted on Black America during this country through the Liberal Plantation, by their Massas in the Big House up on the Hill”

“For Massas Biden, Kennedy, and Metzenbaum, [Clarence] Thomas is sufficiently uppity that he cannot be tolerated under any circumstances. Because, you see, he could rip away the veil that hides the Plantation, the Massas, and all their overseers, thereby exposing their massive fraud for the scam that it is”

On visions of Clarence Thomas’ Judiciary Committee hearings (a year before his nomination):

“It would be sweet to see Senators Biden, Kennedy and Metzenbaum squirm as a self-confident black man turned the tables on their pious bombast, riveting the nation with an explanation of these senators’ betrayal of true civil rights.”

On the campaign to stop Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork:

“The Goebbels-like attack by liberals against Bork featured intentional distortions, shrill personal attacks, blatant intellectual dishonesty, witness intimidation, demagoguery, and lies”

On Judges, activities to engage them in:

After describing two amendments he supported to limit the powers of judges: “I say it’s time for a little public horsewhipping of a few judges. Mr. Justice Brennan for example.“

On Methodists:

“I was raised in the Methodist church. Lengthy, hand-wringing thought-pieces in its church publications about massive membership decline have long been commonplace. But the next time somebody wants to convene a conference to discuss these massive losses (now approaching their fourth straight decade) of mainline Protestant denominations, I would send them instead to the encyclopedia. Look under “Protestant Churches, Mainline Denominations”, sub-heading, “Continuing Membership losses… Cause(s):… Smug Political, Social, and Economic Sermonizing Dressed Up As Christianity… (Liberals preferred, moderates tolerated, conservatives need never apply).“”

On Gay and Lesbian Awareness Day and related issues:

“No doubt there are more of your tax dollars at work here, folks. But after all, what are hardworking taxpayers for? What, indeed, if not: to have our money confiscated; our society trashed; our moral and ethical values trampled; our religions blasphemed; our sensible outrage sneered at; our families threatened and yes, our children and other innocents among us placed at deadly risk? And all it accompanied and enabled by compulsory, tax-paid subsidies, complete with cries of Nazi! and censorship! for anybody with the temerity to express disgust.”

On the Spread of AIDS (column on page 14 of page, displayed sideways):

“The euology [evology? ecology? – RBH] of this horrible affliction is one that continues to confound medical researchers the world over. But there can be no doubt that it was spread here by fantastically, almost unimaginably promiscuous male homosexuals”

On activities which take no skin off of Peter Kinder’s nose (same source):

“I repeat, no argument is advanced here for gay-bashing, My own attitude can be summarized:

If two guys and a chicken want to rent a room somewhere and have a go at each other, it’s no skin off my nose, and I suppose it’s none of the government’s business, as long as they’re consenting adults. (Recruitment and pedophilia are other, highly troubling issues). Whether in doing so our two guys display sufficient sensitivity to the rights of the chicken is another matter indeed. This must surely be the subject of the next Awareness Day, supervised by the Animal Rights people, Poultry Division. I’m sure there are student funds available.”

Reading the Southeast Missourian columns of Peter Kinder make the Tweets seem drab and predictable by comparison. But the years 1988 through 1991 were one heck of a time to be alive, especially on the editorial pages. Don’t let the militant feminists in Peter Kinder’s nightmares tell you any differently. It was a time to go after the boogeyman of the day, or in the case of writers like Kinder, a time to gradually get more and more disappointed with the first President Bush after his 1990 tax hike.

But Peter Kinder’s public life escaped the editorial pages when State Senator John Dennis chose not to seek re-election in 1992, Peter Kinder moved to run for the State Senate. He defeated former First Lady/former State Representative Betty Hearnes by a 55-45 margin, and the rest was history.

Now he’s eying a way to Washington DC. So let’s reflect on his thoughts on Washington DC from a simpler time (column titled: “D.C. A parasite that threatens your health“):

“Make no mistake, Washington is a lovely city, especially in the spring. It is one of the world’s most beautiful cities, full of interesting educational opportunities and stimulating adventures.

For me, however, it will always be Alien Territory”

Well, we’ll see which Republican gets a chance to invade that Alien Territory in a few months, won’t we?

Via the Missouri Secretary of State:

Unofficial Election Returns

State of Missouri – General Election, Tuesday, November 06, 2012

U.S. Representative – District 8 (494 of 494 Precincts Reported)

Jack Rushin Democrat 73,755 24.6%

Jo Ann Emerson Republican 216,083 71.9%

Rick Vandeven Libertarian 10,553 3.5%

Total Votes 300,391

Apparently Representative Jo Ann Emerson (r) has announced, one month after running (and winning) reelection, that she is giving up her seat representing Missouri’s 8th Congressional District:

Missouri Rep. Jo Ann Emerson to resign from House

Posted by Sean Sullivan on December 3, 2012 at 11:17 am

Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R-Mo.) will resign from Congress next February to become President and Chief Executive Officer of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, she announced on Monday….

Electricity? Oh, right (via the Federal Election Commission):

2012 House and Senate Campaign Finance

Election Cycle:  2011-2012

Other Committees Contributions – EMERSON, JOANN

ACTION COMMITTEE FOR RURAL ELECTRIFICATI RECEIPT ARLINGTON VA 22203 02/23/2011 $3,000

ACTION COMMITTEE FOR RURAL ELECTRIFICATI RECEIPT ARLINGTON VA 22203 11/30/2011 $2,000

ACTION COMMITTEE FOR RURAL ELECTRIFICATION PAC ARLINGTON VA 22203 03/30/2012 $1,000

AMEREN FED PAC WASHINGTON DC 20004 03/30/2012 $1,000

AMEREN FEDERAL PAC WASHINGTON DC 20004 07/30/2012 $2,000

AMEREN FEDERAL PAC WASHINGTON DC 20004 09/24/2012 $2,000

AMEREN FEDPAC RECEIPT WASHINGTON DC 20004 06/29/2011 $1,000

AMEREN FEDPAC RECEIPT WASHINGTON DC 20004 04/20/2011 $2,000

AMEREN FEDPAC RECEIPT WASHINGTON DC 20004 06/29/2011 $1,000

AMEREN FEDPAC RECEIPT WASHINGTON DC 20004 11/18/2011 $1,000

ELECTRICAL CONSTRUCTION PAC RECEIPT BETHESDA MD 20814 09/30/2011 $2,500

ELECTRICAL CONSTRUCTION PAC RECEIPT BETHESDA MD 20814 03/11/2011 $2,500

GROWTH ENERGY PAC WASHINGTON DC 20002 06/29/2012 $500

GROWTH ENERGY PAC RECEIPT WASHINGTON DC 20002 11/18/2011 $1,000

KANSAS CITY POWER & LIGHT COMPANY PAC KANSAS CITY MO 64141 09/28/2012 $1,000

KANSAS CITY POWER & LIGHT COMPANY PAC KANSAS CITY MO 64141 07/30/2012 $1,000

KCP&L POWER PAC RECEIPT KANSAS CITY MO 64141 11/18/2011 $1,000  

NATIONAL RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATIONS ACTION COMMITTEE FOR RURAL ELECTRIFICATION PAC ARLINGTON VA 22203 05/30/2012 $2,000

XCEL ENERGY EMPLOYEE PAC WASHINGTON DC 20004 09/24/2012 $1,000

[emphasis added]

According to the FEC, from January 1, 2011 to October 17, 2012 Representative Emerson (r) took in $1,407,909.00 and spent $1,319,012.00 getting reelected to Congress.

For one month in office.

Such a deal.

Her Democratic Party opponent, Jack Rushin, raised $24,217.00 and spent $16,352.00 for the election.

Talking Points Memo informed us a couple of days ago that most of the GOP House contingent is willing to bring on a government shutdown in order to stymie the implementation of Obamacare:

In a letter (PDF) dated July 18, some 127 House GOP lawmakers urged Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) not to permit “any legislation” to come to the floor that includes Affordable Care Act implementation funds. The implied message: shut down the government unless Democrats agree to defund President Obama’s signature law.

Missouri House members who signed the letter (pdf):  Todd Akin (R-2); Vicky Hartzler (R-4); Billy Long (R-7); Sam Graves (R-6) and Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-9). Conspicuous by her absence on this list is Jo Ann Emmerson (R-8). Either she’s got more sense than the other GOPers or she was absent the day the letter was shopped around.

Of course last time that these clowns played the economic brinksmanship game they cost the country $1.3 billion dollars and damaged its credit rating – all to avoid raising tax rates a few paltry percentage points for our wealthiest citizens. Now they’re willing to do the same thing in order to indulge their spite against the Affordable Care Act.

But wait – these guys aren’t quite as stupid as they seem. Today, we learn that while they don’t plan on backing down in the long run, they are willing to delay their temper tantrum until after the election when they’ll no longer have to answer to the constituents their ideological rigidity would have quite correctly angered:

House conservatives urged Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) to back a stopgap spending bill that would extend into 2013 and take the issue of government funding off the table during the election and the jammed lame-duck session this fall.

Odds are that Boehner will go along with this demand because, as TPM puts it, he “must either subdue his right-wing members long enough to get through the election, or place his party’s November hopes in serious jeopardy.”

It seems that every Missouri Republican present  in the House of Representatives today voted for Paul Ryan’s budget. They voted to:

— destroy Medicare as we know it;

— gut the safety net – food aid, Medicaid, educational grants, etc.;

— increase defense spending beyond the amount sought by the military chiefs;

— offer big-time tax cuts for the rich and corporations.

On top of this, because of the tax cuts and the increased military spending, they also effectively voted to increase the deficit. I repeat, they will increase the very deficit that they’ve been incessantly braying about for the past three years.

While it’s true that this budget probably won’t make it through our (endangered) Senate, it does break the agreement between the White House and the Republican leadership that was struck last year, and it will likely bring us a replay of the big government shutdown drama. The people putting this budget forward know that it is a nonstarter, and they know that it will be costly and destructive to our political processes, but they just don’t care. The all games, all the time, GOP prepares to strike again.

According to House Speaker John Boehner, the budget proposal is a “‘real vision'” of how Republicans would govern if they had more control of Washington.” And the folks here in Missouri who will continue to help realize that “vision” if they make it back to Congress when their terms are up: Todd Akin, Vicky Hartzler; Sam Graves, Billy Long, Jo Ann Emerson, and Blaine Luetkemeyer.  

Remember Americans for Prosperity (AFP), the infamous Koch founded and funded organization that, among other achievements, got the Tea Party organized and on track? Want to know just which legislators in Missouri are most in tune with AFP goals? Well, you need wait no longer. The AFP has just issued a scorecard for the 112th Congress.  The grades received by Missouri legislators, listed below (name, party and grade), is about what one would expect:

Roy Blunt (R): B

Claire McCaskill (D): D

Todd Akin (R): A+          

Russ Carnahan (D): F                          

Wm. Lacy Clay (D): F

Emanuel Cleaver (D): D-  

Jo Ann Emerson (R) B      

Sam Graves (R): B        

Vicky Hartzler (R): B  

Billy Long (R): B  

Blaine Leutkemeyer (R): B

If you want a vote breakdown, check out AmericansforProsperity.org/Scorcard. According to the DailyKos’ Meteor Blades:

AFP chose to grade congressmembers based on their votes on repealing President Obama’s new healthcare law, blocking the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gases, supporting the demolition document known as the Paul Ryan budget, ending ethanol subsidies and several Congressional Review Act resolutions as well as the fiscal year 2012 appropriations bills.

This rationale explains just why Republicans get high marks and Democrats get low marks – as a progressive, I’d be very disturbed if any Democrats scored higher than they did. That said, I do have to admit that I was surprised that most of Missouri’s GOP legislators can’t get better than B grades – only uber-winger Akin qualifies for an A grade (A+ actually). They sure talk a good game and one would have expected that they would reap a bigger reward. Perhaps ethanol subsides plays a role in their scores? Also of interest is the fact that no matter how far right she tries to list, poor Claire McCaskill can’t do better than a D. I would have pegged her at C- (for centrist wannabe) myself – if only because of her efforts on behalf of Big Coal.

Duane Graham, of the excellent The Erstwhile Conservative blog, debates whether or not Rep. “Ozark” Billy Long (R-7) deserves praise for joining fellow Missourian Jo Ann Emerson (R-8) and 40 other House Republicans in signing a bipartisan letter to the deficit Supercommittee which, among other things, suggests that revenues must be on the table as the group works its deficit-busting hocus-pocus. Graham concludes that no, indeed, Long does not deserve praise.

Remembering Long’s almost comical eagerness to let the United States government default last July during the debt-ceililng crisis, Graham notes that:

If someone who had been holding a hostage suddenly decided to let him go, would we be obliged to reward the hostage taker by giving him or her a medal of honor?  Republicans, including most of the signers of the letter, have been serial economic hostage takers. The fact that a few of them may have put the gun down and decided to try another way does not merit uncritical admiration.

He adds:

Then, I noticed that the letter did not include any specific proposals or any definition of what “revenues” meant, in terms of raising them….

Indeed, the devil is always in the details, and in that regard the brief letter is remarkably skimpy, simply declaring that:

To succeed, all options for mandatory and discretionary spending and revenues must be on the table. …

My question, though, is whether or not this detail-dwelling devil lets Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-5), who joined 60 other House Democrats in signing the same letter, off the hook. No actual cuts were specified, but Democrats who signed this letter have essentially signified a willingness to permit cuts to the pillars of the social safety net, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

In fact, it’s very hard to see how the vagueness of this letter gives Cleaver any wiggle room. We already know that the Democrats on the Super-Committee have been listing dangerously rightward, and it doesn’t seem like they need more encouragement to give up the game – they’re doing a good enough job already. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities characterizes their leaked plan as a near capitulation:

The Democratic plan contains substantially smaller revenue increases than those bipartisan proposals while, for example, containing significantly deeper cuts in Medicare and Medicaid than the Bowles-Simpson plan. The Democratic plan features a substantially higher ratio of spending cuts to revenue increases than any of the bipartisan plans.

This little bipartisan epistolary exercise has, as well, helped revive the false narrative about a non-existent deficit crisis when we were just beginning to succeed in shifting the emphasis to job-creation instead of more job-killing budget cuts. While vague about specifics, the letter reinforces the deficit crisis meme so wholeheartedly it even demands bigger deficit reductions than the committees’ $1.2 trillion mandate:

… In addition, we know from other bipartisan frameworks that a target of some $4 trillion in deficit reduction is necessary to stabilize our debt as a share of the economy and assure America’s fiscal well-being.

So there we have it. Is Cleaver demanding even more job-killing budget cuts and signaling a willingness to balance the budget on the backs of the poor and elderly? Or is he just trying to be a good, bipartisan fellow and go along to get something, anything, done. And isn’t the latter just as bad as the former?  

Think Progress notes that Todd Akin (R-2), Sam Graves (R-6 ), and Jo Ann Emerson (R-8) voted to raise the debt ceiling in 2004 with nary a squawk about deficit spending. Think Progress‘ writers add that:

All of these Members of Congress can vote for a clean hike again and avert disaster – saving discussions about deficit reduction (and more importantly, jobs) for appropriations debates that take place once America’s financial future is safe.

If they could vote to raise the debt ceiling in 2004 when the national debt was at 7.4 trillion dollars, why can’t they do so now when the major reason that the debt has increased is the recession created by GOP economic policies between 2000 and 2008?   In regard to GOP hissy fits about spending in the Boehner plan, Steve Benen gets it just right:

What will go largely overlooked is that we already are trying things their [i.e., the GOP] way. Whether the GOP wants to admit it or not, the economy is advancing exactly as they want it to. The private sector is being left to its own devices; the public sector is shedding jobs quickly and scrapping investments; and the only permitted topic of conversation is about debt-reduction.

This is the script the GOP wrote. When it’s followed to the letter, Republican complaints are absurd.

Ask yourself, just why can’t these bozos let their deficit cutting stand on its own merits; why do they need to take the economy hostage to get their way if they really have a case? And why now are they trying to create even more chaos and uncertainty? Why are they willing to destroy the economic credibility of the United States? What has the GOP got against us – the American middle class – the folks their insane agenda is going to hurt the worst?

Via Steve Benen at Political Animal:

July 05, 2011 3:20 PM

GOP concludes consumer safety is overrated

…Whatever the reason, the Republican-controlled House Appropriations Committee has approved a spending bill that not only slashes the budget of the Consumer Product Safety Commission but also cuts off all funding for a recently launched database of product-safety complaints…

….Republican Rep. Jo Ann Emerson of Missouri took the lead on this, and has struggled to explain why. There’s no great mystery here….

….The point of the database couldn’t be any more of a no-brainer. The Consumer Safety Product Commission has valuable information, but faces challenges in reaching the public. For very little money, the government has created an online resource that will help families make more informed choices, and create a new incentive for manufacturers to put safe products on the market. As Michael Lipsky explained recently, “One would think it hard to find a politician who opposes reducing preventable dangers to children.”

Meet the Republican Party of 2011.

No mystery, indeed:

…From 1984 through 1996, Jo Ann Emerson worked in public affairs or lobbyist roles for a slew of organizations, including the National Republican Congressional Committee, the National Restaurant Association and the American Insurance Association…

There was a vote in the U.S. House of Representatives to renew the U.S.A. Patriot Act yesterday.

ARTICLE 128. The inviolability of the homes of citizens and privacy of correspondence are protected by law.

Sorry, wrong country. Let’s try that again:

Article 55. Citizens of the USSR are guaranteed inviolability of the home. No one may, without lawful grounds, enter a home against the will of those residing in it.

Article 56. The privacy of citizens, and of their correspondence, telephone conversations, and telegraphic communications is protected by law.

D’oh! Okay, let’s try that just one more time:

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Got it.

The vote:

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 26

H R 514      2/3 YEA-AND-NAY      8-Feb-2011      7:04 PM

     QUESTION:  On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass

     BILL TITLE: To extend expiring provisions of the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 and Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 relating to access to business records, individual terrorists as agents of foreign powers, and roving wiretaps until December 8, 2011

—- YEAS    277 —

Akin

Carnahan

Emerson

Graves (MO)

Hartzler

Long

Luetkemeyer

—- NAYS    148 —

Clay

Cleaver

Russ Carnahan, what were you thinking? The bill failed by seven votes (needing two thirds to pass in an expedited fashion). It will come up for a “regular” vote later in the session.

The bill:

112th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 514

To extend expiring provisions of the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 and Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 relating to access to business records, individual terrorists as agents of foreign powers, and roving wiretaps until December 8, 2011.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 26, 2011

Mr. SENSENBRENNER (for himself, Mr. SMITH of Texas, and Mr. ROGERS of Michigan) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Select Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

A BILL

To extend expiring provisions of the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 and Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 relating to access to business records, individual terrorists as agents of foreign powers, and roving wiretaps until December 8, 2011.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF SUNSETS OF PROVISIONS RELATING TO ACCESS TO BUSINESS RECORDS, INDIVIDUAL TERRORISTS AS AGENTS OF FOREIGN POWERS, AND ROVING WIRETAPS.

     (a) USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005- Section 102(b)(1) of the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-177; 50 U.S.C. 1805 note, 50 U.S.C. 1861 note, and 50 U.S.C. 1862 note) is amended by striking `February 28, 2011′ and inserting `December 8, 2011′.

     (b) Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004- Section 6001(b)(1) of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-458; 118 Stat. 3742; 50 U.S.C. 1801 note) is amended by striking `February 28, 2011′ and inserting `December 8, 2011′.

What does that mean?:

April 18, 2002

CRS Report for Congress

The USA PATRIOT Act: A Sketch [pdf]

….Federal communications privacy law features a three tiered system, erected for the dual purpose of protecting the confidentiality of private telephone, face-to-face, and computer communications while enabling authorities to identify and intercept criminal communications. Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 supplies the first level. It prohibits electronic eavesdropping on telephone conversations, face-to-face conversations, or computer and other forms of electronic communications in most instances. It does, however, give authorities a narrowly defined process for electronic surveillance to be used as a last resort in serious criminal cases. When approved by senior Justice Department officials, law enforcement officers may seek a court order authorizing them to secretly capture conversations concerning any of a statutory list of offenses (predicate offenses). Title III court orders come replete with instructions describing the permissible duration and scope of the surveillance as well as the conversations which may be seized and the efforts to be taken to minimize the seizure of innocent conversations. The court notifies the parties to any conversations seized under the order after the order expires.

Below Title III, the next tier of privacy protection covers telephone records, e-mail held in third party storage, and the like, 18 U.S.C. 2701-2709 (Chapter 121). Here, the law permits law enforcement access, ordinarily pursuant to a warrant or court order or under a subpoena in some cases, but in connection with any criminal investigation and without the extraordinary levels of approval or constraint that mark a Title III interception.

Least demanding and perhaps least intrusive of all is the procedure that governs court orders approving the government’s use of trap and trace devices and pen registers, a kind of secret “caller id.”, which identify the source and destination of calls made to and from a particular telephone, 18 U.S.C. 3121-3127 (Chapter 206). The orders are available based on the government’s certification, rather than a finding of a court, that use of the device is likely to produce information relevant to the investigation of a crime, any crime. The devices record no more than identity of the participants in a telephone conversation, but neither the orders nor the results they produce need ever be revealed to the participants.

The Act modifies the procedures at each of the three levels. It:

– permits pen register and trap and trace orders for electronic communications (e.g., e-mail);

– authorizes nationwide execution of court orders for pen registers, trap and trace devices, and access to stored e-mail or communication records;

– treats stored voice mail like stored e-mail (rather than like telephone conversations);

– permits authorities to intercept communications to and from a trespasser within a computer system (with the permission of the system’s owner);

– adds terrorist and computer crimes to Title III’s predicate offense list;

– reenforces protection for those who help execute Title III, ch. 121, and ch. 206 orders;

– encourages cooperation between law enforcement and foreign intelligence investigators;

– establishes a claim against the U.S. for certain communications privacy viola
tions by government personnel; and

– terminates the authority found in many of these provisions and several of the foreign intelligence amendments with a sunset provision (Dec. 31,2005).

Yeah, apparently that temporary violation of the 4th Amendment is well on its way to becoming permanent.

And those teabaggers and their favored republicans who profess so much concern for the Constitution? It must only extend to keeping affordable health care from poor people.

In Ireland abortion is illegal. This prohibition, the legacy of government for many years in thrall to the Irish Catholic Church, was tested by an international controversy in 1992 when a fourteen year old girl, a victim of abuse by a family friend, was denied permission by the Dublin High Court to travel to England for an abortion. After an extensive period of negative international publicity and internal Sturm und Drang, the ruling was reversed by the Irish Supreme Court on the grounds that under a 1983 amendment to the Irish abortion law, the right to life of a pregnant woman is at least equal to that of a fetus, and, as the girl was suicidal, her life was threatened by the pregnancy.

This ruling established the only exception to Ireland’s anti-abortion policy, though it continues to be an exceptionally fraught issue. The controversy was fictionalized in Edna O’Brian’s 1997 novel, Down by the River, which vividly depicts the emotional travail caused by state meddling in private lives in the service of majority religious beliefs.

I bring up the Irish “X Case,” as it was called, because, if Todd Akin, Blaine Luetkemeyer, Jo Ann Emerson, Billy Long and Vicky Hartzler have their way, American women will be facing situations just as stupid and sad. This political rogue’s gallery of forced birthers have all signed on to co-sponsor HR3, the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,” which would limit the rape exemption for federal abortion funding to instances of “forcible” rape. This limitation could easily have exempted the young girl in the X case who became pregnant after abuse which might not have met the criteria of force since the facts surrounding her rape were initially in dispute.

Abortion is, of course, still legal in the U.S., and would continue to be so if HR3 is passed since it only pertains to restrictions on public funding. Its provisions are far reaching enough, though, that, if passed, it could have a vastly more far-reaching impact, even for those of us who rely on private insurance. Since the 86% of insurance plans that offer abortion coverage would no longer be tax-deductible for employers, the number of those plans would almost inevitably dwindle along with affordable access to abortion for the middle classes as well as the poor, who, at first glance, would seem to be most likely to be seriously affected.

It is the rape and incest provisions, however, that offer the best picture of the sclerotic mindset behind this proposed legislation. HR3 would restrict abortion funding for individuals who find themselves pregnant as a result of coercion or intimidation, sexually abused children, and pregnant rape victims who were drugged, given alcohol, or who are mentally impaired. Since HR3 rejects current federal definitions of rape and does not define forcible rape explicitly, it is even possible that all cases of rape could be addressed in such a way as to fall outside the exemptions. As for incest, our GOP representatives evidently think it’s just fine if the victim is over 18.

Interestingly, the European Court of Human Rights recently ruled that Ireland violated the human rights of an Irish woman suffering from cancer who was forced to travel to England for an abortion. Since Ireland is a member of the European Union, this ruling means that abortion laws there will probably undergo a serious review. Meanwhile, here in the U.S., our right to self-determination is increasingly endangered by meddling fools like, for instance, Rick Santorum, a former GOP Senator from Pennsylvania who  is unable to decide whether the life of a two-year old child takes priority over five fertilized eggs in a petri dish.

I remember from my rollicking undergraduate days a story about a young American man who, while changing flights in Dublin, tried to buy condoms and was promptly arrested since birth-control was then illegal in the Republic. HR3 represents such a potentially devastating attack on our right to govern our own bodies that I begin to wonder if I should start marking the days until we in the U.S. will have turned back the clock to something like those bad old days in Ireland. If so,  Missourians will know exactly whom to blame.