Call Your Senator Today To Fight Illegal Warrantless Surveillance!

Sen. Russell D. Feingold (D-WI) said yesterday that he would ask the Senate to censure President Bush for authorizing a warrantless surveillance program.

Announcing plans to introduce a censure resolution today, Feingold said, "The president must be held accountable for authorizing a program that clearly violates the law and then misleading the country about its existence and its legality."

Feingold, appearing yesterday on ABC's This Week, added: "We as a Congress have to stand up to a president who acts as if the Bill of Rights and the Constitution were repealed on Sept. 11," he said.

***

Finally, someone understands. Now it's time for Americans to rally behind Feingold, and rally behind a president following the law. Americans should call their Senators today and voice their support for Feingold's measure.

Why? As JABBS has noted, the White House claimed it had "inherent authority" to conduct such surveillance, but that argument was questionable, especially after the White House supported legislation from Sen. Mike DeWine (R-OH) to "further codify" the surveillance program.

In other words, the White House wanted it both ways -- it wanted people to accept the program as legal, and to pass legislation to make it legal. That may sound illogical, but neither the White House nor Congressional Republicans seemed to care. As DeWine said, "We don’t want to have any kind of debate about whether it’s constitutional or not constitutional."

The final straw came last week, when the Senate Intelligence Committee voted along party lines against an investigation of the warrantless surveillance program. Instead, Congressional Republicans cut a deal with the White House to provide Congressional oversight for warrantless surveillance. While that may solve the problem of making the program legal going forward, it doesn't solve the problem of the White House conducting an illegal program since the days immediately following the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

***

Censure, which the Senate describes as "a formal statement of disapproval," carries no legal penalty. A president has been censured only once, in 1834 — when the Senate, controlled by members of the Whig Party, censured Democratic President Andrew Jackson for seeking to withdraw deposits from the privately run Bank of the United States.

***

This item first appeared at JABBS.

Who didn't know that. The shock and surprise of these people just amazes me.
It is something I've been hoping would happen for a long time. WAKE UP!

but haven't seen an overwhelming response. Last week on DU, after the deal with cut between the Intelligence Committee and the WH, only a tepid response to my call for people to reach out to Democratic leaders and demand that they hold Bush accountable.

and am ashamed to admit I don't know how to find my new reps. Can someone give a site?

okay same state same Senators. Do you have a link for the Congresscritters?

edit ps. I cannot stand Kay Baily Hutchison. But we've been stuck with her for YEARS! I think she was comptroller when bushwack was governor. Coattails. We really need to do something about coattails.

both have not "made a statement". They are both repuks but I got to make a comment and said support Feingold and I'm sure Republicans are getting just as fed up as we are. I used to spend a lot of time writing letters and making calls and just never noticed any difference. But it does feel good to voice.

but when I was in my formative days, I was a conservative. I wrote Lloyd Benson, Jim Wright, Martin Frost, and Reagan tons of letters. What really ticked me off is I wanted Bork. Like I said, conservative. Lloyd had a bag full of letters in his office supporting that nomination, and he ignored them all. Voted against. Now that may have been the correct thing to do. I wish more dems now would stand the party line.


I crossed over. Grew up. But it still seems that they just don't listen. I'm fighting from this side of the field now. Even in the build up to war, constituents were locked out of Kerry and Hillary's offices. What does it take? I think they do what they want and screw the rest of us. Yes. That's cynical. But prove me false. I don't have a corporate lobby. But that's what we need isn't it? We need a liberal money making machine. Is that possible?

the Republicans, if nothing else, have a cohesive message machine. They frame issues with their language and make things into a "you're with us or against us," mode. How can anyone be against the Clean Skies Initiative? The Healthy Forests Initiative? Terrorist Surveillance? The War on Terror?

We need a Frank Luntz, and we need to have our guys on the tv, radio and in the newspapers talking up the issues. It's ridiculous to have the Republicans frame the issue, and then also couch the Democratic response as wimpy, wussy or un-American.

http://www.vote-smart.org/index.htm

There's a zip code search box on the left.

I just tried the senate site I posted above and it is having "technical difficulties". Uh huh. But the Vote Smart site worked fine just now.

It is the job of the Senate to provide the checks and balances for the Executive Branch. So, DO YOUR JOB or we'll find some people who WILL in November!

We need to hit 'em where it has an impact on them, and hold them accountable for doing their job.

I'm going to be calling my Senators right now!

at least if/until they take back Congress in November.

Many folks have reported that his staffers are telling callers that he is "absolutely" supporting Feingold's resolution.

Not sure about Kennedy, but I'd guess yes.

In fact, Shelby sounds like an echo of bushco... He's on TV shaming Alabama alot, listen to him if you like but keep nausea medicine handy.

... and when is he going to introduce that federal stem cell funding legislation he promised last fall? Frist is Bush's best friend in the Senate ...

:kick::kick::kick::kick::kick: