Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Russ Feingold, Robert Byrd to Bush: You Have no Authority

Posted by Russ Feingold, AlterNet at 2:12 PM on July 23, 2008.


Two Dems go after Bush's attempt to jump-start WTO talks.
feingoldheadshot

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

The President
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear President Bush,

The United States is participating in a Ministerial meeting of the World Trade organization (WTO) this week in Geneva, Switzerland. We understand that the purpose of this summit is to finalize an agreement on certain outstanding issues related to the WTO Doha Round.

The announcement of this WTO Ministerial was surprising to us. Typically high-level negotiations only occur when all parties have authority to make a deal. Yet, the U.S. Constitution grants Congress exclusive authority "to regulate commerce with foreign Nations" and to "lay and collect Taxes [and] Duties."

As you know, for decades U.S. presidents have obtained delegations of this congressional trade authority under what is commonly known as Fast Track. However, your delegation of Fast Track Trade Promotion Authority terminated on June 30, 2007. Congress has refused to provide you with further authority -- either more Fast Track or any other form of trade authority -- nor is there any prospect of that occurring before the end of your term. Indeed, it is likely that in the future the Fast Track process will be replaced altogether with a trade negotiation and approval mechanism that better reflects Congress's constitutional role regarding trade policy.

Therefore we are interested in understanding what USTR Schwab or other U.S. trade officials are representing to other countries' officials regarding their capacity to make binding commitments at this Ministerial on behalf of the U.S. Congress.

We are eager to ensure that if U.S. trade negotiators participate in the current WTO ministerial, they represent U.S. positions that comport with the sort of WTO agreement that could obtain support in the U.S. Congress.

Sincerely,
Russell D. Feingold
United States Senator

Robert C. Byrd
United States Senator


Broken Glass
This is no doubt one of the ugliest periods in American political history.
Post by DCap. October 11, 2008.
Bipartisan Concern About the Dangers of McPalin’s Hate-Mongering
"I accuse you of deliberately feeding the most unhinged elements of our society the red meat of hate ..."
Post by Emptywheel. October 10, 2008.
Stock Market Drops 107 Points During Bush's Speech on the Economy
That's the kind of confidence Bush inspires these days.
Post by Amanda Terkel. October 10, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Hmm, AND THIS WAS AN EMAIL FROM ACLU, JUST CAME HOME, MURDERERS @ 1600.
Posted by: Turiye on Jul 23, 2008 3:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This administration has jumped off the cliff, seriously Psychopathic in every way. How can they think they'll get away with this, HOW???
Go to : http://action@aclu.org/mukasey
___________________________________________

Dear ACLU Supporter,

Here they go again. On Monday, Bush’s Attorney General, Michael Mukasey, called on Congress to take dramatic steps to subvert the Constitution.

Mukasey is demanding that Congress issue a new declaration of war that would make the entire globe -- including the United States itself -- a “battlefield” where the president decides who will be locked up forever.

Instead of ending the Bush system of injustice, he wants Congress to make it permanent.

Tell Congress to reject the Bush/Mukasey plan to subvert the Constitution.

Not only has Bush’s Attorney General called on Congress to issue a new declaration of war, but he is also asking Congress to:

1. Gut habeas corpus -- the freedom that protects people from being thrown in prison illegally -- with no help, no end in sight and no due process.

2. Cover up the Bush administration’s systemic torture and abuse of detainees. Judges would not be allowed to see evidence of torture and abuse and would instead simply have to trust that a president is holding the right people as ”enemy combatants.”

With only five weeks left in the congressional schedule and only six months left in the Bush presidency, Mukasey’s power grab should be laughed out of town. But, given this Congress’ track record, the Mukasey proposal is no laughing matter.

Tell Congress to reject the Bush/Mukasey plan to subvert the Constitution.

Too many times, we’ve seen Congress cave in to the most outrageous Bush demands for out-of-control powers: The Patriot Act. National Security Letters. The Military Commissions Act. The Protect America Act. And, most recently, the congressional sell-out on FISA.

Four times the Supreme Court has rejected the Bush administration’s efforts to design a war on terror system of injustice that defies the Constitution and mocks the rule of law. In the past, the administration has responded, not by respecting the Constitution, but by counting on Congress to legitimize its indefensible conduct.

There is no way we can let that happen this time. Even as the House Judiciary Committee investigates whether high-level Bush White House officials may have committed crimes of torture and abuse, the Bush administration has the arrogance to ask Congress to give it the power to detain people without trial and hide torture and abuse from the courts.

Tell Congress to reject the Bush/Mukasey plan to subvert the Constitution.

We can’t take for granted that Congress will reject the Bush/Mukasey plan. We have to meet this outrageous proposal with an immediate wall of protest that says to Congress: “Don’t you dare.”

I urge you to join defenders of freedom all across the country in raising your voice against Attorney General Mukasey’s dangerous proposal.

Thanks for speaking out,


Caroline Fredrickson, Director
ACLU Washington Legislative Office

P.S. You can read a blog post from Christopher Anders, ACLU Seinor Legislative Counsel, on the Bush/Mukasey plan to subvert the constitution here.
© ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004













Unsubscribe from receiving email, or change your email preferences.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Congratulations
Posted by: rickiey on Jul 23, 2008 7:02 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You've now figured out that there are limits to Presidential Powers.

Now go FINISH reading the Constitution, (I promise, it gets even better!) and learn that there are limits to CONGRESSIONAL powers as well!

Yes, it is true. Just think all you have to do is read the Constitution and you could learn about such concepts as "Separation of powers" and to distiguish the "Legislative branch" from the "Judicial Branch"!!

I KNOW!! You thought they were the same, right?? No, I'm not psychic, I've just observed the actions of Congress for the last few years, and yes, its obvious that you could all use a refresher.

Here's a hint: Before you decide to be the Judiciary and the Executive branch, first clean up yourselves as a Legislature.

Balance the budget bitches. Quit blaming Bush for the budget.

Quit trying to hold trials of the executive branch. It's wildly popular but it's a waste of your time, and your time IS my money and I'm pissed about you pissing it away.

Speaking of pissing my money away, get in there, and bitchslap those who try to earmark funds for moronic wastes of time. We don't need to spend 800,000 to see if bees make more honey from violet flowers than they do with purple ones. (No, that isn't a current earmark, but it had you wondering, didn't it?)

Spend our money wisely, or spend it not at all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Congratulations Posted by: progdem
» RE: Congratulations Posted by: rickiey
» RE: Congratulations Posted by: peacefullaim
» RE: Congratulations Posted by: oldumbo
Isn't it great
Posted by: chaoslegs on Jul 24, 2008 6:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When being a strict constitutionalist blows up the corporate-conservative dreams?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]