Break

The New York Times ran a great editorial today about the power of the purse to curtail the presidential power to make war. If you read what some of the Founding Father’s wrote you would think they were addressing President Bush.

“The founders were particularly wary of giving the president power over war. They were haunted by Europe’s history of conflicts started by self-aggrandizing kings. John Jay, the first chief justice of the United States, noted in Federalist No. 4 that “absolute monarchs will often make war when their nations are to get nothing by it, but for the purposes and objects merely personal.”

The founders would have been astonished by President Bush’s assertion that Congress should simply write him blank checks for war. They gave Congress the power of the purse so it would have leverage to force the president to execute their laws properly. Madison described Congress’s control over spending as “the most complete and effectual weapon with which any constitution can arm the immediate representatives of the people, for obtaining a redress of every grievance, and for carrying into effect every just and salutary measure.”

The framers expected Congress to keep the president on an especially short leash on military matters. The Constitution authorizes Congress to appropriate money for an army, but prohibits appropriations for longer than two years. Hamilton explained that the limitation prevented Congress from vesting “in the executive department permanent funds for the support of an army, if they were even incautious enough to be willing to repose in it so improper a confidence.”

Our Founding Father’s were wise to assign the power of the purse to Congress. Congress shouldn’t fear political backlash by using it.

This morning on CBS’s Face the Nation, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich advised fellow conservatives not to talk about President Bush’s record. “President Bush is not the future. He’s not a solution. He doesn’t solve Social Security. He doesn’t solve Medicare. He doesn’t solve the economy. He doesn’t solve the environment. He doesn’t solve education. He’s a current fact” Gingrich said.

What I don’t get is why didn’t the Republicans led Congress deal with these issues while they were in control? They certainly had the opportunity.

In a shameful move, one that clearly shows their utter contempt for women and minorities in this country, Republicans in the Senate try to block the minimum wage increase.

Senator Kennedy expressed his disdain toward the other side of the aisle in his statement shown below:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SicFn8rqPPE]

Some of these amendments are in the form of tax breaks for small businesses whom Republicans charge will bear the brunt of the bill for the increase.
Continue Reading »

Ok, so someone must be lying. After my last email from Verizon where they can neither confirm or deny any participation with the NSA I read this article where Verizon says it didn’t give NSA customer phone records.

I must say I’m certainly glad that Verizon hasn’t been giving out my phone records. If they did, they would know I call my wife frequently, don’t call my parents nearly enough and I … well that’s pretty much it. I don’t make many phone calls.

With my faith in large corporations well restored I went back to work, hoping to put all this behind me. No sooner did I breathe a sigh of relief when I read this:

New Presidential Memorandum Permits Intelligence Director To Authorize Telcos To Lie Without Violating Securities Law. What this article basically says (IANAL) is that in regards to national security matters a corporation can hide (lie) about it’s activities to shareholders.

Here is the memorandum:

[Federal Register: May 12, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 92)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Page 27941-27943]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr12my06-146]

[[Page 27941]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part III

The President

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Memorandum of May 5, 2006--Assignment of Function Relating to Granting
of Authority for Issuance of Certain Directives

Presidential Documents

___________________________________________________________________

Title 3--
The President

[[Page 27943]]

Memorandum of May 5, 2006

Assignment of Function Relating to Granting of
Authority for Issuance of Certain Directives

Memorandum for the Director of National Intelligence

By virtue of the authority vested in me by the
Constitution and laws of the United States, including
section 301 of title 3, United States Code, I hereby
assign to you the function of the President under
section 13(b)(3)(A) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended (15 U.S.C. 78m(b)(3)(A)). In
performing such function, you should consult the heads
of departments and agencies, as appropriate.

You are authorized and directed to publish this
memorandum in the Federal Register.

(Presidential Sig.)B

THE WHITE HOUSE,

Washington, May 5, 2006.

[FR Doc. 06-4538
Filed 5-11-06; 9:04 am]

Billing code 3910-A7-M

Here are the relevant sections in the SEC code:

With respect to matters concerning the national security of the United States, no duty or liability under paragraph (2) of this subsection shall be imposed upon any person acting in cooperation with the head of any Federal department or agency responsible for such matters if such act in cooperation with such head of a department or agency was done upon the specific, written directive of the head of such department or agency pursuant to Presidential authority to issue such directives. Each directive issued under this paragraph shall set forth the specific facts and circumstances with respect to which the provisions of this paragraph are to be invoked. Each such directive shall, unless renewed in writing, expire one year after the date of issuance.

I just don’t know what to believe anymore.

I read the article the other day about Verizon, Southwest Bell and AT&T handing over my phone call records to the NSA. My first reaction was disbelief. Why would Verizon want to risk annoying their customers. So, I fired off an email to their customer support. Here is the response.

Dear Verizon Customer,

Thank you for contacting the Verizon eCenter. My name is Raquel, and I will be handling your request today.

This message is in response to your email dated May 16, 2006. You inquired about the National Security Agency (NSA) news article . I will be happy to assist you.

We appreciate that the USA Today article and other reports about the possibility that the NSA is able to analyze local call data records is causing concern. Please be assured that Verizon places the highest value on protecting the privacy of our customers.

Anything to do with the NSA is of course highly classified, so we can not comment on whether or not the news article causing concern is even accurate. But we can say that, to the extent that we cooperate with government authorities, we are confident that we are complying with all applicable statutes. We appreciate the continuing opportunity to provide you with service.

Thank you for using Verizon. We appreciate your business.

Sincerely,
Raquel
Verizon eCenter

Not exactly the response I was looking for. I guess I’m going to have to start looking for some Constitution friendly communication providers.