From the Inbox

Today's entry contains a very good idea - one that could go a long way toward putting the country back on its feet and back on the right track. However...

Let's get to the e-mail first:

Please consider forwarding, if you agree.

I have cleaned this e-mail of all other names, sending it to you in hopes that you will keep it going and keep it clean. This is something I believe in and I hope you all read it all the way through.

The 26th amendment (granting the right to vote for 18 year-olds) took only 3 months and 8 days to be ratified! Why? Simple! The people demanded it. That was in 1971...before computers, before e-mail, before cell phones, etc.

Of the 27 amendments to the Constitution, seven (7) took 1 year or less to become the law of the land...all because of public pressure.

I'm asking each addressee to forward this email to a minimum of twenty people on their address list; in turn ask each of those to do likewise.

In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one idea that really should be passed around.

Congressional Reform Act of 2011

1. Term Limits. 12 years only, one of the possible options below.
A. Two Six-year Senate terms
B. Six Two-year House terms
C. One Six-year Senate term and three Two-Year House terms

2. No Tenure / No Pension.
A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.

3. Congress (past , present and future) participates in Social Security.
All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people.

4. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.

5. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

6. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.

7. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.

8. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/12.
The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen. Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves.

Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work.

If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take three days for most people (in the U.S. ) to receive the message. Maybe it is time.

LET'S FIX CONGRESS!!!!! If you agree, pass it on. If not, just delete. You are one of my 20+. Please keep it going.

Now for the "However..."

According to the National Archives (www.archives.gov):

The Constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the State legislatures. None of the 27 amendments to the Constitution have been proposed by constitutional convention.

Now, what do you suppose the odds are of any Congressperson introducing such a thing to their peers? Hmm...

If our politicians were the kind of stand-up people with the necessary gumption to cut their own throats for the good of the country, well, we really wouldn't need such an amendment now, would we?

Thank God for the ACLU

At least SOMEBODY still has some fight left in them:

“With one vote, Congress has strengthened the executive branch, weakened the judiciary and rendered itself irrelevant,” said Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. “This bill – soon to be law – is a constitutional nightmare. Americans should know that if this legislation is enacted and upheld, what they say on international phone calls or emails is no longer private. The government can listen in without having a specific reason to do so. Our rights as Americans have been curtailed and our privacy can no longer be assumed.”

In advance of the president’s signature, the ACLU announced its plan to challenge the new law in court.

“This fight is not over. We intend to challenge this bill as soon as President Bush signs it into law,” said Jameel Jaffer, Director of the ACLU National Security Project. “The bill allows the warrantless and dragnet surveillance of Americans’ international telephone and email communications. It plainly violates the Fourth Amendment.”

More here: www.aclu.org/fisa

Rove MUST be held in inherent contempt

The scene pictured at left is the only acceptable outcome to Karl Rove's refusal to accept the subpoena issued to him by the United States Congress.

By opting to defy a Congressional committee’s subpoena, which is a writ requiring that he appear to give testimony, he is disobeying, challenging, violating and/or refusing to provide a truthful account of many of the questionable activities of the Bush administration.

The immediate response to this by anyone in their right mind is, "how can this be?" How can he flatly refuse to appear and believe that the House Judiciary and the American people will accept his decision, forget the whole affair and move one to investigating "steroids in Baseball" or other such nonsense..

HOW & WHY? …..because he and others believe that they are above the law and need not adhere to its demands. Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten did it and this is "Bush’s Brain" that we are talking about here!

Could you or I get away with defying a Congressional subpoena? HELL no! So why can Karl Rove? Like George Bush and Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, believes he is simply above the law.

It’s time for Congress to prove them wrong by using its power of "inherent contempt" to send the Sergeant-at-Arms to arrest Karl Rove and bring him before the full House to answer to the charge of Contempt of Congress, and to punish him to the maximum extent allowed by law, including prison.

Montagano added to DCCC's "emerging candidates" list

Some great new news (Okay, I heard about it several days ago, but great news nonetheless! I received the following email today from the Michael Montagano campaign, and would like to share it with you here. Please help in any way that you can. We simply cannot allow another term for Mark Souder, any more than we can allow a third Bush McCain term.

MONTAGANO ADDED TO THE DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE'S RED TO BLUE "EMERGING CANDIDATE" LIST - 6/23/2008

Dear Montagano for Congress supporter,

I have some very exciting news for you. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) just announced that our campaign has been added to their Red to Blue "Emerging Candidate" list. I am now the only democratic challenger in Indiana, one of few from the Midwest, one of only 50 nationwide to secure this national party recognition.

By adding us to the "Emerging Candidate" list, the national party has expressed confidence that I will be the next congressman from Indiana.

It's a reflection of what we have known for a while: That Northeast Indiana is hungry for change, that I will deliver it, and that Mark Souder is extremely vulnerable.

But now is not the time to celebrate… we have to roll up our sleeves and get to work.

We have less than seven days before the end of this reporting quarter, June 30, 2008, to raise the necessary funds to get our message out there. We have launched an initiative to raise $50,000 in our last week.

We are asking each website visitor to consider a small contribution of $25, $50 or $100 dollars to our campaign today. Click here to make your secure online contribution to our campaign:

Bye Bye to Marky Mark

I thank you for your consideration of this contribution and I look forward to working with you on the way to victory in November.

Sincerely,

Mike Montagano

Pick up the Torch

An important message from Barry Welsh:

The Violent Radicalization & Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act

An Act passed by The House in late October and currently before the Senate Homeland Security Committee is as bad as or WORSE than the McCarthy Era when people were labeled and jailed for anything HE deemed UNAMERICAN ACTIVITIES.

Language inserted in the act does partially define "homegrown terrorism" as "planning" or "threatening" to use force to promote a political objective, meaning that just thinking about doing something could be enough to merit the terrorist label.

The act also describes "violent radicalization" as the promotion of an "extremist belief system" without attempting to define "extremist."

Here is the FULL TEXT OF THE BILL:
Note Section 899A Homegrown Terrorism where it becomes a crime "to intimidate or coerce the US government, the civilian population or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objective". And Section 899B Paragraph 3 – The internet is a tool of terror.

Votes on the Violence, Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorist Act.

Bringing the War on Terrorism Home: Congress Considers How to 'Disrupt' Radical Movements in the United States.

Philip Giraldi from the Huffington Post wrote more about the Act.

The Haliburton Presidency

Just in from the DCCC - Be sure to watch the video:


Dear John,

Been to the gas station lately? Gas prices have more than doubled since George Bush took office -- it's an outrage.

Thanks to the Republican road blocks in Congress, gas prices continued to skyrocket just in time for the holiday travel rush -- ensuring that millions of dollars flowed into the pockets of their Big Oil friends and out of the pockets of America's hardworking families.

Remember the Bush Administration's secret meetings with their Big Oil friends to develop our nation's energy policy? We need to make sure the Halliburton presidency is in the past -- but with more than 60 Democrats sitting in seats that Bush carried in 2004, this November, Republicans will try to turn back the clock.

But, we aren't going to let them. With less than a year out, help us send a message to the Republican road blocks in Congress and in the White House that you won't stand for their $50 or more for a tank of gas. We want to raise $120,000 by November 30th to target the DOZEN worst Republican offenders and keep our campaign to strengthen our Majority moving forward.

Send Obstructionist Republicans a Message: Contribute today and be sure to add an extra $3.07 for the current average gallon of gas.

Since January, Democrats have been fighting to undo the 12-year era of Republicans who let Big Oil to write America's energy laws.

This year, Speaker Pelosi and House Democrats have led the fight by passing bills to end tax breaks for Big Oil, outlaw price-gouging at the pump, and stop foreign oil cartels from dictating how much Americans pay to fuel our cars and heat our homes. But with House Republicans continuing to block this progress on behalf of their Big Oil friends, we need your help to hold them accountable today.

Contribute today to ensure we never turn back the clock and that we keep America moving forward. Be sure to add an extra $3.07 for the current average gallon of gas.

There are only 3 days left before November 30th and we need to raise $120,000 for our campaign to succeed.

Together we can ensure that House Republicans who help Big Oil at the expense of America's middle class families pay an even higher price at the polls next year than we paid at the pump last week.

Sincerely,

Brian Wolff
Executive Director

Despite Image Gains, Dem Leadership Continues to fail We The People

These numbers all show slow and steady improvement, as they well should. However, Democratic leadership is still completely out of step with the will of the American people. We the people elected you in a clear mandate one year ago with some specific goals in mind. Among those goals were: holding this administration accountable and ending the debacle in Iraq.

While I am happy that you now have and have used the power of the gavel to ever-so-slowly lift the large slimy rock of secrecy that has cloaked the abuses of these cronies and their butt-lickers over the last 7 years, I and the vast majority of citizens who elected you to be our agents of change, are furious over your lack of resolve in checking George W. Bush and Dick Cheney when it comes to Iraq!

Ms.Pelosi, if you actually follow through on today's threatened action regarding further funding (or UNfunding if you will) of this military action, then you will at least have started moving in the right direction. Your actions thus far have left me little hope for this, however, and it has grown more and more difficult for myself and my peers to place much trust nor value in the strong words that pass from your lips.

On another note, Dennis Kucinich ( Who really IS an advocate for We The People) has actually gotten his measure to impeach Dick Cheney through the house and into committee, yet, for some strange and unknown reasons, Mr.Conyers has also developed a bad case of the shivers. More to the point, he is acting as if his testicles are in someone's iron grip. This is the very same Mr.Conyers who was instrumental in the release of the Downing Street Memo. The Conyers that has dogged this administration long before it ever became publicaly or politically popular to do so.

We The People have lots and lots of questions on these matters, Nance! What are you, Harry Reid, Conyers, et al, so afraid of? Does this administration have blackmail dirt on all of you? Are you more concerned about the 2008 election than the good of our country? Or are you just so completely out of touch with middle America that you actually think we are with you on these misguided and HORRIBLY WRONG stances?

We The People await your response. . .

John Q. Public to Bush: NO!

Majority of Americans favor Democrats to handle Iraq and healthcare:

Shamelessy "borrowed" from The Washington Post:

Most Americans oppose fully funding President Bush's $190 billion request for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and a sizable majority supports an expansion of a children's health insurance bill the president has promised to veto, putting Bush and many congressional Republicans on the wrong side of public opinion on upcoming foreign and domestic policy battles.

The new Washington Post-ABC News poll also shows deep dissatisfaction with the president and Congress. Bush's approval rating stands at 33 percent, equal to his career low in Post-ABC polls. Congressional approval is even lower: Just 29 percent approve of the job the Congress is doing. That is Congress's lowest approval rating in this poll since November 1995, when Republicans controlled both the House and Senate, and represents a 14-point drop since Democrats took control last January.

Still, the public rates congressional Republicans (29 percent approve) lower than congressional Democrats (38 percent approve). And when the two parties are pitted directly against one another, the public broadly favors Democrats to handle Iraq, health care, the federal budget and the economy. Only on the issue of terrorism are Republicans at parity with Democrats.

Part of the dissatisfaction with Congress stems from the stalemate between Democrats and the White House over Iraq policy. Most Americans do not think Congress has gone far enough in opposing the war, with liberal Democrats especially critical of their party's failure to force the president into a significant change in policy.

Overall, 55 percent of Americans want congressional Democrats to do more to challenge the president's Iraq war policies, while only a third think the Democrats have already gone too far. The level of agitation for more action in opposition to the war has not dissipated since August 2005, when Democrats were the minority party in Congress.

More than eight in 10 liberal Democrats said Congress has been too restrained, while about the same percentage of conservative Republicans said it has been too aggressive. A narrow majority of independents, 53 percent, wants more congressional action.

At the same time, there is no consensus about the pace of any U.S. troop withdrawals from Iraq. In July, nearly six in 10 said they wanted to decrease the number of troops there, but now a slim majority, 52 percent, thinks Bush's plan for removing some troops by next summer is either the right pace for withdrawal (38 percent) or too hasty (12 percent would like a slower reduction and 2 percent want no force reduction); fewer, 43 percent, want a quicker exit.

A central challenge for all policymakers is that those who want more congressional action are not unanimous in what they would like Congress to do. Almost all of those who would like congressional Democrats to do more to oppose the Iraq war disapprove of how the president has handled the war effort, but about a quarter want U.S. troops to remain in Iraq until civil order is restored, and more than a third see Bush's plan to withdraw the "surge" troops by next summer as about right or even too fast.

There is broader public agreement, however, on how Congress should approach the war funding issue. Only about a quarter of all adults want Congress to fully fund the administration's $190 billion request for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan over the next year, while two-thirds want the proposed allocation reduced, with 43 percent wanting it reduced sharply. (Three percent say Congress should approve no money at all.)

Two-thirds of independents want Congress to reduce the funds allocated for the war effort, as do 83 percent of Democrats; 45 percent of Republicans agree.

Bush and the Republicans may also be headed for a political setback from the fight over the State Children's Health Insurance Program, even if Congress fails to override Bush's threatened veto, with broad bipartisan support for the new legislation.

More than seven in 10 support the planned $35 billion spending increase, and only 25 percent are opposed. About half of Americans "strongly" support the increased spending; 17 percent are that firmly against the additional money. And the program expansion has majority support across party lines: Eighty-one percent of Democrats, 69 percent of independents and 61 percent of Republicans are in favor.

Democrats hold a big edge over Republicans on handling the nation's health-care issues more generally. Overall, 56 percent said they trust Democrats to handle health care, and 26 percent side with the GOP on the issue. About one in eight doesn't trust either major party. Only 30 percent give Bush positive marks on his handling of health care. Democrats also have public trust leads on other key issues, including Iraq (Democrats have a 15-point advantage), the economy (18 points) and handling the federal budget deficit (23 points). The two parties are at parity on handling the U.S. campaign against terrorism; 41 percent put more faith in the Democrats on the issue, 40 percent in the Republicans.

Translating these advantages into political momentum, however, has proved a tricky proposition. Congressional ratings are low, and falling, and despite progress toward some of the Democrats' primary stated goals, few Americans credit Congress with significant progress this year.

The drop-off in Congress's approval rating over the past six months has been precipitous among Democrats and independents. Barely a third of liberal Democrats now approve of the job Congress is doing; in April, 59 percent approved. Among independents, 24 percent approve, equaling last year's pre-election low mark for the GOP-controlled Congress.

Independents broke heavily for Democratic candidates in the 2006 midterm elections, powering their takeover.

In this poll, independents spread their discontent. About three in 10 rate Democrats in Congress positively, while just 23 percent give congressional Republicans a good review. Since April, independents' support for the Democrats in Congress is down 20 percentage points; approval of the Republicans is down 11 points.

The congressional Democrats have also lost some of their standing among self-identified Democrats and Republicans, as their overall rating has dipped from 54 percent in April to 38 percent in this poll. At 29 percent, Republicans in Congress rate only as high as the institution.

Deteriorating reviews of congressional job performance are linked to a broad-based assessment that Congress has not accomplished much this year. Overall, more than eight in 10 Americans, including large majorities across party lines, said Congress has accomplished "not too much" or "nothing at all" this year. And the percentage granting Congress more achievement is down from April, again led by declines among Democrats and independents.

Few, however, pin a "do nothing" label solely on Congress.

By a 2-1 margin, those who see little accomplishment in the Congress's first nine months place more blame for the inaction on the president and the GOP rather than on the majority Democrats. Some 51 percent place primary fault with the president and congressional Republicans, 25 percent on the Democrats; two in 10 volunteer that both parties share the blame equally. Among independents, 43 percent blame the Republicans, 23 percent the Democrats, and nearly three in 10 blame both sides equally.

The poll was conducted Thursday through Sunday among a national random sample of 1,114 adults. The results from the full poll have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

Call Dick Lugar @ 1-202-224-4814 and. . .

. . .let him know that while you were encouraged by his talk of changing the course in Iraq, you are extremely disappointed and outraged that he voted against making that change last night! It's really absurd when you think about it. . .Lugar actually stayed up all night to defend the president's disastrous policy in Iraq. And voted to keep the filibuster going!

All through the night last night, Democratic Senators called for a simple vote to change the course in Iraq. But despite the fact that the vast majority of the American people and a growing majority of Congress are calling for change, the Lugar and his fellow Republicans blocked a vote and gave the president license to continue his disastrous policies.

The Levin-Reed Amendment would have forced the president to start reducing the number of U.S. combat forces in Iraq within 120 days and transition the mission to limited counter terrorism, force protection and training of Iraqi security forces. It calls for a comprehensive diplomatic, political and economic strategy that includes sustained engagement with Iraq's neighbors and the international community so that we can all work together to bring stability to the region.

The situation in Iraq continues to deteriorate. The Iraqi government has not met the benchmarks and the readiness of the Iraqi security forces is well behind expectations. Our military is stretched thin with extended deployments in Iraq, and we are less secure at home and less able to respond to other crises. We are spending over $10 billion a month in Iraq and losing too many family members.

We must change the course in Iraq. We can't give up now. Let Mr.Lugar know that you demand a change in his Iraq stance NOW, not in September! Call him today at 1-202-224-4814!

Reid to GOP: "Put up or shut up"!

Forcing his Republican colleagues to put up or shut up on the notion of an up-or-down vote, Senate Majority leader Harry Reid announced today that he will immediately file a cloture motion on the Reed-Levin troop redeployment bill and, if Republicans follow through with a filibuster, will place the Senate in a prolonged all-night session Tuesday to force a true continuation of debate.

"Now, Republicans are using a filibuster to block us from even voting on an amendment that could bring the war to a responsible end," said Reid. "They are protecting the President rather than protecting our troops. They are denying us an up or down – yes or no – vote on the most important issue our country faces."

The Reed-Levin amendment to the Department of Defense (DoD) Authorization Bill requires George W. Bush to "commence the reduction of the number of United States forces in Iraq not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act" and mandates a withdrawal of most combat forces by April 30, 2008. Here is the text of the bill:

SEC. 1535. REDUCTION AND TRANSITION OF UNITED STATES FORCES IN IRAQ.

(a) Deadline for Commencement of Reduction.--The Secretary of Defense shall commence the reduction of the number of United States forces in Iraq not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

(b) Implementation of Reduction as Part of Comprehensive Strategy.--The reduction of forces required by this section shall be implemented as part of a comprehensive diplomatic, political, and economic strategy that includes sustained engagement with Iraq's neighbors and the international community for the purpose of working collectively to bring stability to Iraq. As part of this effort, the President shall direct the United States Permanent Representative to the United Nations to use the voice, vote, and influence of the United States at the United Nations to seek the appointment of an international mediator in Iraq, under the auspices of the United Nations Security Council, who has the authority of the international community to engage political, religious, ethnic, and tribal leaders in Iraq in an inclusive political process.

(c) Limited Presence After Reduction and Transition.--After the conclusion of the reduction and transition of United States forces to a limited presence as required by this section, the Secretary of Defense may deploy or maintain members of the Armed Forces in Iraq only for the following missions:

(1) Protecting United States and Coalition personnel and infrastructure.

(2) Training, equipping, and providing logistic support to the Iraqi Security Forces.

(3) Engaging in targeted counterterrorism operations against al Qaeda, al Qaeda affiliated groups, and other international terrorist organizations.

(d) Completion of Transition.--The Secretary of Defense shall complete the transition of United States forces to a limited presence and missions as described in subsection (c) by April 30, 2008.

"I would like to inform the Republican leadership and all my colleagues that we have no intention of backing down," said Reid this afternoon. "If Republicans do not allow a vote on Levin/Reed today or tomorrow, we will work straight through the night on Tuesday. The American people deserve an open and honest debate on this war, and they deserve an up or down vote on this amendment to end it."

Reid could hold the Senate in continuous session overnight Tuesday and into midday Wednesday unless Republicans agree to a simple-majority vote on Reed-Levin.

Sara, uh, Taylor.

Just in case you missed Sara Taylor's "testimony"before Congress, here it is in a nutshell. . .

INHERENT CONTEMPT

A House panel began clearing the way today for contempt proceedings against former White House counsel Harriet Miers after she obeyed President Bush and skipped a hearing on the firings of federal prosecutors. Miers not appearing could subject her to contempt proceedings, including but not limited to the seldom-used INHERENT CONTEMPT authority of the House of Representatives. This was last used against a postmaster general back in 1934.

WHAT IS INHERENT CONTEMPT?

Under the inherent contempt power, the individual is brought before the House or Senate by the Sergeant-at-Arms, tried at the bar of the body, and can be imprisoned. The purpose of the imprisonment or other sanction may be either punitive or coercive. Thus, the witness can be imprisoned for a specified period of time as punishment, or for an indefinite period (but not, at least in the case of the House, beyond the adjournment of a session of the Congress) until he agrees to comply. The inherent contempt power has been recognized by the Supreme Court as inextricably related to Congress’s constitutionally-based power to investigate.

If Congress doesn’t use Inherent Contempt and goes to the Justice Department for subpoena enforcement it would fall to the US Attorney, a BUSH APPOINTEE, who may have to recuse himself for conflict of interest (as we suspected yesterday.) THAT would lead to the appointment of a SPECIAL PROSECUTOR which might be the BEST thing.

This could turn into a rather entertaining showdown after all. . .

The Common Sense Budget Act

Do you think our government should provide health insurance to children who don't have it? Rebuild America's crumbling schools? Cut our reliance on foreign oil? Rep. Lynn Woolsey from California certainly does, and that's why she's introducing a bill that does just that - without raising taxes. Will you help her make it the law of the land?

I'm Rep. Lynn Woolsey from California, and I've just introduced the Common Sense Budget Act,¹ which I wrote with the folks at TrueMajority.org. This bill would take $60 billion in wasted Pentagon spending and use it instead on education, health care and other human needs programs that we all care about. (And regardless of how you feel about the "War on Terror", you should know that it won't take any money from our troops in Iraq or Afghanistan, which are funded separately.)

Retired Generals, Admirals, even a former Asst. Secretary of Defense say it's a good idea, and most of the public agree. But to make it happen, Congress needs to hear from you. Tell your Representative that you support a Common Sense Budget and ask them to join me by cosponsoring this bill.

I've been working with TrueMajority.org and Business Leaders for Sensible Priorities on this issue for a couple of years. When we started, the idea of taking money from the Pentagon (even though it's money that's being wasted on obsolete 'Cold War era' weapons) to help pay for social programs was pretty novel. But in our first session, we got 38 members of Congress to cosponsor the bill, as well as state legislators endorsing the campaign across the country. And when you add their support to the list of retired admirals and generals, 700 business leaders, and the majority of the American public, we're a lot closer to getting a budget that takes care of our needs at home -- and cuts back on runaway Pentagon spending -- than we were two years ago.

Now we have a new Congress and a new tone in Washington, but we need to build even more support in order to see the changes we know are right. So please email your Representative today and encourage him or her to endorse the Common Sense Budget Act.

Sincerely,

Lynn Woolsey Member of Congress

Click HERE for more information on this act and it's impact on us all.

Sunlight Foundation results

Late last year, the Sunlight Foundation enlisted it's member investigators to review the websites of our senators and congressmen for transparency in a selected number of categories. The results are now in, and nobody is doing an acceptable job across the board, and from all political affiliations. This link will take you to the results for the state of Indiana.

Click HERE to select your state if you don't claim to be a Hoosier Bloosier! It appears that there is much room for improvement, and I strongly encourage you to contact your representatives about the Sunlight Foundation's efforts to shine a light on their job performance, disclosures of lobbyists, and contributors.