Today the New York Times reports on the continuing failure of the Michael Mukasey as Attorney General experiment. Back in November we at the Courage Campaign didn’t much like the notion of an Attorney General Mukasey, but Senator Dianne Feinstein strongly disagreed. She got a lot of pushback and defended her case in an LA Times OpEd that she might want back at this point given the way reality has actually played out. Let’s play point/counterpoint between Feinstein’s argument in November and the New York Times today:
Feinstein:
During a long career in public service and private practice, Michael B. Mukasey has forged an independent path as a lawyer and federal judge.
Sen. Arlen Specter:
“I don’t want to use the word ‘disappointed,’ but he hasn’t provided the balance that I had hoped for”
Feinstein:
Judge Mukasey is not Alberto R. Gonzales. In our confirmation hearings (and subsequently, in writing), Judge Mukasey’s answers to hundreds of questions were crisp and to the point, and reflected an independent mind.
…
The Justice Department is in desperate need of effective leadership. It is leaderless, and 10 of its top positions are vacant. Morale among U.S. attorneys needs to be restored, priorities reassessed and a new dynamic of independence from the White House established.
Sen. Patrick Leahy:
But Mr. Mukasey is “letting the worst excesses of the Gonzales era stand,” he continued, “and that disappoints me. It’s like saying, ‘I’m going to be a place holder,’ and this is a man who certainly has the ability to be something more than a place holder. He doesn’t want to rock the boat.”
Feinstein:
In the hearing, Judge Mukasey clearly expressed his personal repugnance regarding torture. And in a letter dated Oct. 30, he reiterated his personal views and described in detail the analysis he would undertake if confirmed.
NY Times (emphasis mine):
From fending off calls to investigate accusations of torture to resisting a nationwide strategy against mortgage fraud, Mr. Mukasey has taken a go-slow approach that has surprised even some admirers, who see him as unwilling to break from past policies and leave his own imprint in the closing months of the Bush administration.
Feinstein:
I do not believe a president can be above the law, and neither does Judge Mukasey. In addition, Judge Mukasey explained that his view on executive power is based on an analysis of the Supreme Court’s 1952 decision in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. vs. Sawyer. Justice Robert Jackson wrote in that decision that the president’s power is greatest when he is backed by statutory authority from Congress, and at its lowest ebb when his actions are in conflict with a statute.
NY Times (emphasis mine):
But perhaps his biggest accomplishment has been the expansion of the government’s wiretapping powers under a bill signed into law by President Bush this month. Mr. Mukasey had little active role in the day-to-day negotiations with Congress, Congressional officials said. But he and Mike McConnell, director of national intelligence, sent a series of sharply worded letters to lawmakers, keeping the pressure on them to update the surveillance law and provide legal immunity to the phone companies that took part in the eavesdropping program approved by Mr. Bush after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
After a months-long impasse over the surveillance measure, administration officials hailed its passage. But critics saw it as a continuation of the status quo under Mr. Mukasey. “I think he was determined to sustain the administration’s position,” Mr. Specter said, rather than work to scale back the White House’s claims to executive power after the controversy caused by the domestic wiretapping program.
Essentially, Senator Feinstein’s entire argument has been refuted by Mukasey’s actual performance on the job. While she wasn’t the only one involved, her proactive work to confirm Mukasey has done a major disservice to the rule of law and health of the Constitution in this country. But if we needed any further evidence that Mukasey is actually nefarious as opposed to lazy or incompetent, look no further than the week he’s delivering to us right now. Mukasey has embarked upon a campaign to compel Congress to pass a law altering the Constitutional right of habeas corpus, overruling the courts and the intentions of the founding fathers while also conveniently covering up the abuses delivered by the Bush Administration at Guantanamo Bay. He isn’t just failing to fix the problem, he’s now neck deep in trying to cover it up. The Attorney General is the lawyer for the government, but the law itself is supposed to still come first. Mukasey is actively seeking to subvert the rule of law, and we have, in part, Senator Feinstein to thank.
Subject: Re: L’ affair du Singh and Feinstein Censure
i agree w/the whole gabriel thing – he is doing nothing to foster party building — he’s really mad about something, and feinstein just happens to be the target d’jour.
ooooh more french 🙂
however, while i think that we get distracted sometimes by the resolution of the moment and I think this feinstein thing is the biggest waste of time i can imagine, (at times i feel like it’s a way to distract us about where to put this word or that word in order to keep us from focusing on the big picture and allowiing people get lost in the minutiae of the process)
People are losing focus. Feinstein has a good record on most of the practical stuff I care about.
If we are not faulting Obama for sliding on this one, what’s the percentage in getting our knickers twisted over her unsurprising and predictable positions regarding ‘national security’ and ‘terrorism’?
However, I diverge from John about being an activist regarding issues and the policy that results.
I believe it is extremely important for local dem clubs to be activists about issues – issues and policy are what make us Democrats, not candidates who are nice and make us feel good.
And I believe it is up to us to let our elected people know where we stand on issues – we elect them, this is not a feudal system.
Those issues drive our candidates and drive the activism behind a candidate, you know, that stuff that gets them elected?
Our job is to reach out and carry the democratic message and policies to the peeps and put candidates forward who will
embody our policies and provide solutions to what we know are the issues that need addressing.
We have been working in LC on single payer health care for close to two years, we have followed legislation, written letters, we have gone to rallys with our labor folks, we have hosted forums, networked w/retirees, other dem groups, we called big time b.s on the ‘compromise’ that our State Dem leadership tried to cram down our throats early in the year.
We have instigated a campaign that is spreading out, to have citizens call upon their local elected jurisdictions to actually DO THE MATH, and see what the savings would be to taxpayers if California passed single payer.
Sheila Kuehl walks on water as far as i’m concerned (and i bet she’s nice and she does make me feel good 🙂 )
We have written numerous ltte to the local media, staking out our ground as dems on the issue, we brought “sicko” to our teeny little commercial theater by working with many other groups in the county, to packed houses for several showings a day for 4 days i may add.
i would venture to say that if anyone asked who has done the most to bring the message of single payer and a modicum of understanding about the issue, into the mainstream conversation, in LC they would say ‘the local democrats’
Same with the war, while we dont spend all month every month focusing on activism, we feel we must stake out the territory and define the ISSUE as democrats — and sometimes it comes to us in the form of actions from other dem orgs.
LC endorsed and wrote to all our federal legs, urging them to consider endorsing the responsible plan 3 months ago.
i’m glad to see the uber liberals in alameda county catching up 🙂
In order to define ourselves, frame our message, and take control of the dialog we must take positions on issues.
Same w/the SS privatization scam in 2005, we packed Mikey’s pro forma forum — he was stunned to see that people actually were paying attention. We knew he would do the right thing, but we wanted him to know how much it meant to actual people that he do that right thing.
Because i think the candidate needs to pull the cart, carrying policies we want, not the other way around.
He doesnt just say. “i’m a dem, we’ll figure all that policy stuff out later, you guys just jump on please”
yes i have to compromise many times in order to actually win at the ballot box, in order to foster dialog w/my electeds, in order to formulate a position that as many people can buy into as possible, but any negotiation begins from the high ground and i have every intention of staying there, until i am dragged off.
If I dont have a starting place, i’m (and we are) lost — or spineless, or whatever the disaffected want to call us these days.
For instance this FISA thing is absolutely incomprehensible, but I realize the sad fact that many of our Dems, our party’s standard bearer included, are covering their butts in a corporate reality, perhaps not of their making, but they certainly whistled past the graveyard many times, in order to be put in the positions they are in now. They have nowhere to go, but to take cover and play the game and hope no one notices — too much, again, …
But that’s not even the problem…the telecoms wont be prosecuted – so what?
Who lost out when the s&ls collapsed in the 80’s? A few were made examples of.
How many women workers died in the Triangle shirtwaist factory fires at the turn of the century?
How many miners were killed in during the Cripple Creek mining wars in Colo by coroporate thugs?
The history of this country is the rank and file working class sacrificing their liberties, their rights, not to mention life and limb for an inch of progress.
Nothing to see here, move along — in the 200 plus years of this country, it has ever been thus.
This is nothing new, and i’m inured to it, I have read my Howard Zinn.
The ISSUE that is being totally overlooked is the SPYING!!! — sure let the bigwigs off the hook for breaking the law, happens every day, but the fact remains that these congress critters are either too dumb (which I doubt) or think that we’re too dumb (which i suspect) to know that the 4th amendment is on life support, barely breathing.
Oh dont worry, i hear, when the Dems get in it will all be fixed — as my nineteen year old nepew would say, “uh seriously dude?” — not unless we take the issue on head on and fight for it.
Issues and policy, not candidates, not personalities, issues and policy– and upholding the US constitution is a pretty huge issue w/me and a policy i’d like my elected Dems to adhere to.
I think it’s Martini time! 🙂
John Rapf wrote:
Some thoughts regarding the recent comments to & from Gabrial Singh that I think kind of cross flowed between the Rural Caucus and TakeBackRedCalifornia….
First, regarding the process that TBRC follows to decide whom to support, obviously temperament must be an important attribute. If an individual has not mastered the art of disagreeing without being disagreeable, then that person probably would not serve our interests well in government. One reason I support Jeff Morris for Congress and that I hope TBRC will support also, is that having watched Jeff as a Supervisor I know he has an ability listen and work with people he does not agree with. Government in a democracy cannot function otherwise. Jeff will make an excellent Congressman, whereas Gabrial’s talents are probably better suited as an op-ed writer.
Regarding the Feinstein censure, folks who know me know that I take a dim view of these things. If we value diversity, then we should recognize that it is not just racial, ethnic, religious or etc., but also ideas and perspective. Some of the most important lesson’s I’ve learned have come from people who come at problems from a much different viewpoint than I. I may be wrong, but Senator Feinstein has received more votes, both in numbers and percentage, than any other Democrat in recent CA politics. She must be doing something right. I also think that she probably votes pretty consistently, but certainly not always, the way Progressive Democrats would like.
As constituents, if we have disagreements with an elected politician then we should as individuals let that person know. As Rural Caucus and TBRC members we should be looking to build a farm team of progressive politicians that might better reflect our respective organizations values and goals. The next time Feinstein runs, then folks who feel strongly enough should promote a candidate to challenge her in the primary.
As we enter into the Fall election campaign we have, in my view, a historic opportunity to elect Democrats all the way down the ticket. That should be our complete focus. We should not be spending one iota of time on Censure or Responsible Plan (another one making the rounds) Resolutions.
John Rapf
Northern V-P CDP Rural Caucus
Area 1 Team Coordinator, Trinity,
Obama for America Campaign ’08
Si se puede!
CDP Rural Caucus not only wants to hold our current legislators feet to the fire. We want to move the Party forward in some new directions. Please visit our website link in the Caucus section of www.cadem.org to participate in drafting our Questionaire for ’09 CDP Chair candidate.or join our Yahoo Newsgroup to continue the dialogue.
Thanks to Bob Brigham, who brought these to us in Austin, we have a number of buttons that read “iCensure DiFi” – you see mine at right:
(also pictured are buttons for the heroic Darcy Burner)
We’ve passed out several dozen already to Californians and others who support holding our Senator accountable for her repeated failures on the Constitution and on protecting the rule of law. Interestingly we’re distributing them while Harold Ford is speaking.
There’s a lot of talk this year about more and better Democrats. Generally the “and better” part means primary campaigns and being selective in the candidates that we support with time, money and cyber ink. The other side of that is holding our representatives accountable in ways outside the ballot box, because sometimes we can’t just wait for re-election to get responsive representation; too much happens. It’s not always easy to find effective ways to get attention and movement, but passion and creativity can be combined into a potent mix.
Last week Senator Dianne Feinstein voted to give away our 4th Amendment privacy protections and grant retroactive immunity to the telecom companies who may have been illegally complicit in domestic spying on U.S. citizens. It was hardly the first time that Sen. Feinstein has given us reason for serious concern. Once before, her support of previous iterations of FISA legislation, Judge Leslie Southwick and now-Attorney General Mukasey inspired us to insist she pay attention to Californians. We asked you whether it was time to pursue censure again, and more than 12,000 of you responded with a clear message.
Rick Jacobs sent an email this morning running through the results, explaining where we go from here, and asking you to help:
The results are in.
Over 12,000 Californians voted on one of the most important questions we have ever asked our community: whether or not the Courage Campaign should re-launch a censure resolution against Senator Dianne Feinstein at the next meeting of the California Democratic Party.
And, driven by your mandate to take action, that is exactly what we’re going to do. From her FISA votes supporting telecom immunity to her shocking swing votes confirming Bush nominees Michael Mukasey and Leslie Southwick, enough is enough.
For this people-powered “Censure the Senator” movement to succeed, we need your support before the California Democratic Party (CDP) executive board meets again. To hold Sen. Feinstein accountable, it will take money to organize people. It’s as simple as that.
For far too long, we’ve watched as congressional Democrats — the party in power — have failed to hold President Bush accountable for torture, war and warrantless wiretapping. 95.4% of our members and supporters say that it’s got to stop. As Annie from San Francisco wrote to us, in voting YES to censure:
We have to (censure Sen. Feinstein). It’s hard to have to call out our politicians on so many issues and votes, but they keep disappointing us over and over again. We can’t let these votes go unprotested.
That’s what a “censure” is — a protest. As Wikipedia describes it, censure is “a procedure for publicly reprimanding a public official for inappropriate behavior.”
Other than voting in an election, a public censure is also our only recourse as citizens to express our condemnation of Sen. Feinstein’s votes last week to grant retroactive immunity to the Bush Administration and telecom companies for spying on Americans.
Last year, Sen. Feinstein was also the crucial swing vote on the Judiciary Committee to confirm two extremist Bush appointments — a torture-condoning Attorney General and a racist judge (Michael Mukasey and Leslie Southwick).
Those two Judiciary Committee swing votes mobilized 35,039 Californians — in just one week — to co-sign a censure resolution supported by the Courage Campaign, MoveOn, Progressive Democrats of America and 38 Democratic Clubs across California.
A few days later, at the Executive Board meeting of the California Democratic Party, both the Women’s Caucus and Progressive Caucus passed the censure resolution — an unprecedented and historic action inside the party. Unfortunately, the resolution got bottled up in the Resolutions Committee and was ultimately voted down.
Thank you for doing everything in your power to make 2008 a new era for progressive politics in California.
Rick Jacobs
Chair
P.S. Frankly, a censure resolution is merely a piece of paper unless there’s a people-powered movement behind it. That’s why your contribution to our “Censure the Senator” campaign will be an investment in changing the Democratic Party in California and across the country.
“A Heavy Heart.” That was the subject of the email I received today from Senator Chris Dodd. After fighting tooth and nail for many months, with a coalition cobbled together on the fly, brought together by a fundamental drive to protect the Constitution, the Senate was finally able to force through a new FISA bill including retroactive immunity for telecom companies.
It’s been an educational road for netroots activists in particular and Democratic activists in general. Developing effective methods of demanding and receiving accountability from out elected officials is still a work in progress. But in a number of very encouraging ways, the FISA fight over these many months has helped uncover what ideas held promise and afforded the chance to refine them. We may not have won this one, but we sure as hell made it a lot harder along the way.
A number of Democrats abandoned the Fourth Amendment to vote for immunity, including Senator Dianne Feinstein. It’s been a relatively tough year for the Constitution when Feinstein’s been faced with challenging votes, and this sadly was no exception. But it’s important to hear Senator Dodd’s words today:
…let us stand tall, knowing that by working together we were able to make wiretapping and retroactive immunity part of the national discourse these last number of months.
We came together – all of you, Senator Feingold, bloggers like Jane Hamsher and Glenn Greenwald, organizations like the EFF and ACLU, and untold hundreds of thousands of Americans who simply wanted to make sure that this one, last insult did not happen with ease.
I’m sorry we weren’t successful.
And so Rick Jacobs put the accountability challenge to Courage Campaign supporters today via email. What are we going to do about it? His email is on the flip.
“If we do not change course and stand up for our Constitution, for what is best in America, for what we know is right and just, then history will most certainly decide that that it was those of us in this body who bare equal responsibility for the President’s decisions — for it was us who looked the other way, time and time again.”
— Senator Christopher Dodd, July 8, 2008, on the Senate floor during debate on yesterday’s re-authorization of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).
Yesterday, Senator Dianne Feinstein failed Californians. Again.
In 2007, Sen. Feinstein failed us by providing the deciding Judiciary Committee swing votes that paved the way for the appointments of Michael Mukasey, President Bush’s torture-condoning nominee for Attorney General, and Leslie Southwick, a racist and homophobic judge.
And now, she has failed us on the Constitution itself, concealing a crime perpetrated by the Bush Administration and telecom companies against the American people.
Despite thousands of calls from concerned citizens, virtually shutting down her phone lines for the last week, Sen. Feinstein failed to vote for the pivotal Dodd/Feingold amendment to the re-authorization of FISA that would have denied retroactive immunity to telecom companies for illegally wiretapping the phones of Americans. Sen. Feinstein then voted for the FISA bill itself, effectively pardoning George W. Bush.
We’ve tried everything to get Sen. Feinstein’s attention. Phone calls. Emails. Faxes. Petitions. Protests. Smoke signals. We even launched an online petition supporting a proposed California Democratic Party censure resolution of Sen. Feinstein last November that spread like wildfire across the grassroots, with 35,039 Californians signing on in support.
The censure movement also catalyzed national media attention, fueled by endorsements from MoveOn.org, Progressive Democrats of America, the California Democratic Party Women’s Caucus and Progressive Caucus, as well as 38 chartered Democratic Clubs across California.
A number of people have asked if the Courage Campaign would support holding Senator Feinstein accountable for caving on warrantless wiretapping by re-launching the censure resolution inside the California Democratic Party. It’s an important question but, frankly, a censure resolution is merely a piece of paper unless there’s a people-powered movement behind it.
That’s why we’re putting this decision in your hands today. If grassroots and netroots activists across California support a new censure resolution of Senator Feinstein, we will launch a censure campaign leading up to the California Democratic Party’s next Executive Board meeting.
California’s other Senator, Barbara Boxer, stood strong against retroactive immunity for telecoms and the Bush Administration, voting the right way twice — against the FISA bill and for the Dodd/Feingold amendment. She also had this to say on the floor of the Senate:
“The Bush warrantless surveillance program did not have the consent of the governed, and it was certainly not just.
Truth is the centerpiece of justice. The immunity provision in this bill effectively sweeps the warrantless program under the carpet, along with the rights and civil liberties of those whom we are sworn to protect — the American people.
The immunity provision hides the truth from the American people. They deserve better from us.”
We appreciate the courage and conviction of Barbara Boxer. On issue after issue, she is a shining light representing our progressive state.
Which is why it is all the more galling that Senator Feinstein, representing the same deep blue state, continues to give political cover to a President who views the Constitution as a disposable document.
You are at ground zero in this decision. While this vote will not reverse what happened yesterday on FISA, that doesn’t mean we can’t use the process provided by the California Democratic Party to express, as the previous censure resolution stated, the “disappointment at, and censure of, Senator Feinstein for ignoring Democratic principles and falling so far below the standard of what we expect of our elected officials.”
No matter whether you support censure or not, please vote and ask your friends and family to vote by forwarding this message to them. To make this a people-powered decision, we need as many people as possible to participate.
Thank you for holding our elected officials accountable and making 2008 a new era for progressive politics in California.
Rick Jacobs
Chair
P.S. If Senator Feinstein cares about nothing else, she cares about her legacy. At this moment, whether she knows it or not, Senator Feinstein’s place in history has been soiled by a decision that she will likely later regret, if only because it may have catalyzed concerned Californians to hold her accountable.
UPDATE by Dave: Today is NOT the big day. Jesse Helms, in his most positive act as a Senator, died over the weekend, and his funeral will delay the FISA vote until Wednesday. There will be debate in the Senate today, with votes likely tomorrow. You have additional time to call your Senators.
…………………………………….
The United States Senate will soon vote on whether to provide retroactive immunity to the big telecom companies who broke the law with George Bush and violated the constitution with warrantless wiretaps (beginning before 9/11). From her absurd perch on the Judiciary Committee, Senator Dianne Feinstein has been leading the push to protect Bush by protecting the telecoms and preventing discovery in the case so the American people never get their day in court and our country may not be able to find out the true extent of shredding of the Constitution that DiFi enabled. Senator Feinstein put our presidential nominee in an awful position with her representation of the administration and made a joke of Art Torres.
Today is the big day and if Senator Feinstein violates her oath of office and does not defend the Constitution, she is likely to face censure again. And while DiFi never responded to the outcry by over 40 wonderful organizations leading the push to censure her, we do know where she stands on censure. You see, Feinstein once pushed her own censure resolution and tell me if the language she used doesn’t sound like she thinks she should be censured.
WHEREAS — William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States, engaged in an inappropriate relationship with a subordinate employee in the White House, which was shameless, reckless and indefensible;
WHEREAS — William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States, deliberately misled and deceived the American people and officials in all branches of the United States Government;
WHEREAS — William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States, gave false or misleading testimony and his actions have had the effect of impeding discovery of evidence in judicial proceedings;
WHEREAS — William Jefferson Clinton’s conduct in this matter is unacceptable for a President of the United States, does demean the Office of the President as well as the President himself, and creates disrespect for the laws of the land;
WHEREAS — President Clinton fully deserves censure for engaging in such behavior;
WHEREAS — future generations of Americans must know that such behavior is not only unacceptable but also bears grave consequences, including loss of integrity, trust and respect;
WHEREAS — William Jefferson Clinton remains subject to criminal actions in a court of law like any other citizen;
WHEREAS — William Jefferson Clinton’s conduct in this matter has brought shame and dishonor to himself and to the Office of the President; and
WHEREAS — William Jefferson Clinton through his conduct in this matter has violated the trust of the American people;
Now therefore, be it resolved that: The United States Senate does hereby censure William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States, and condemns his conduct in the strongest terms.
Now be it further resolved that: The United States Senate recognizes the historic gravity of this bipartisan resolution, and trusts and urges that future Congresses will recognize the importance of allowing this bipartisan statement of censure and condemnation to remain intact for all time; and
Be it further resolved that: The Senate now move on to other matters of significance to our people, to reconcile differences between and within the branches of Government, and to work together — across party lines — for the benefit of the American people.
The great statement by Senator Barbara Boxer on how those who vote for retroactive immunity, “are perpetuating a cover-up” is good news for everyone who defends the Constitution. While Sen. Boxer has yet to vow to join the Feingold/Dodd filibuster, the thinking by many seems to be that Boxer will fight hard for what she believes in so many activists I’ve talked to are excited by anticipated aggressive maneuvering by Boxer to stop retroactive immunity.
As for the other senator…there is a great deal of concern that Senator Dianne Feinstein will capitulate. While defending Senator Feinstein against the push to have her formally censured by the California Democratic Party, Chair Art Torres said:
I said I think it’s important that you hear this from me because there’s also concern about the telecom immunity issue which will come before the senate judiciary committee. Don’t believe me, ask my friend Senator Dodd, who will tell you that she led the effort along with him to make sure that that wasn’t in the FISA bill that emerged from the senate judiciary committee. That bill as you know does not include the telecom immunity issue, which was a very important issue for me, and I’m proud that she listened, because she does.
Does she? (202) 224-3841
If not, she is likely to again face a censure push by CDP activists seeking to hold her to account.
We are writing with great concern regarding reports the Democratic leadership has struck a deal which will further erode civil liberties by circumventing the original FISA laws, and we ask that you not only oppose this new FISA bill but that you filibuster its advancement in the Senate.
We are deeply disappointed in our Party and its leadership for capitulating to the Bush administration with this utterly unnecessary legislation–but you are our Senator, from the great and progressive state of California, and as your constituents we have a right to expect better leadership from you.
We wish to note that in an official statement regarding a previous FISA bill, you defended the telecom industry, stating they had no choice but to break the law–but in this you were incorrect: They did have a choice, proven by the fact Qwest chose to obey the Constitution rather than wiretap without proper FISA warrants. We would also remind you the telecoms’ illegal activity began well before the attacks of 9/11.
We need better answers and better representation from our senior Senator. It was with great pain that, last year, we moved several California Democratic Party caucuses to censure you for your approval of an Attorney General who condoned torture, and for your previous support for telecom immunity. We would prefer not to censure you again, but to instead applaud you for doing what is right and protecting our Constitution rather than protecting corporations and the Bush administration. We ask you to stand with the vast bulk of your constituents who side with the rule of law.
Thank you,
Yours,
Michael Jay, Delegate, California Democratic Party, 42nd Assembly District
Ricco Ross, California Democratic Party, 42nd Assembly District
Co-Chairs, Progressive Democrats of Los Angeles
Linda Sutton, CDP Delegate, 41st AD, Vice Chair of Progressive Democrats of Los Angeles
Last time, the push for censure united an amazing array of organizations in less than a week, including:
Endorsed by the Courage Campaign, MoveOn.org Political Action, Progressive Democrats of America, Progressive Caucus of the California Democratic Party, Women’s Caucus of the California Democratic Party, Irish-American Caucus of the California Democratic Party, Steering Committee of the East Bay for Democracy Democratic Club, Sonoma County Democratic Central Committee, Wellstone Democratic Renewal Club, the Coordinating Committee of SoCal Grassroots, San Diego Democracy for America, the Steering Committee of Progressive Democrats of Los Angeles, Sacramento for Democracy, DFA-Orange County, Santa Cruz County for Democracy, Trinity County Democratic Central Committee, Diablo Valley Democratic Club, Ventura County Committee to Stop the War, Progressive Democrats Sonoma County, the Inyo County Democratic Central Committee, the Torrance Democratic Club, San Mateo County Democracy for America, Castro Valley Progressives, the Whittier Area Peace & Justice Coalition, Santa Barbara Impeach Cheney & Bush Meetup Group, Democracy for America – Marin (DFA-Marin), Valley Democrats United, the Executive Board of the West LA Democratic Club, Progressive Democrats – San Francisco, Greenwood Earth Alliance, Hammering the Issues, Westchester Democratic Club Executive Board, Young Democrats of UCI, the North (San Fernando) Valley Democratic Club, Lassen Progressives, Castro Valley Democratic Club Executive Board, Progressive Democrats of Marin, Progressive Democrats of America – Metro San Diego Chapter, Sonoma County Democracy for America, Progressive Democrats of America Orange County, and Progressive Democrats of America Ventura County.
And Rick Jacobs made the teevee (I do so work for Courage Campaign):
As the focus intensifies over this bill, here are some of the emails I’ve received as of late.
The House passed a version of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) last week that included retroactive immunity to the telecom companies that conspired in Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program. And now, as the bill heads to the Senate, it looks like we have one last chance to stop this massive erosion of the rule of law.
Thankfully, we have a few champions, like Russ Feingold and Chris Dodd, who look poised to fight this to the very end, but they can’t do it alone. They need both strong support from progressive senators and the vote of those senators currently sitting on the fence. This is where you come in.
Sen. Feinstein could be the deciding voice and vote on stopping retroactive immunity. Please take a minute right now to give her a call and ask her to strip the retroactive immunity provision of FISA.
Senator Feingold effectively summed up the insanity of retroactive immunity yesterday by saying, “It doesn’t simply have the impact of potentially allowing telephone companies to break the law. It may prevent us from ever getting to the core issue…which is the president ran an illegal program that could’ve been an impeachable offense.”
I hope that you’ll join me and do what you can to help prevent this from happening.
Over the last 8 months, you and I have stopped Congress from granting retroactive immunity to telecommunication companies who illegally spied on Americans for the Bush administration — at least three times.
On Friday, Democratic Leadership in the House of Representatives decided to stand with President Bush instead of with America. They voted for a so-called “compromise” to let AT&T, Verizon and the entire Bush administration off the hook for lying to America and illegally tapping our phone calls.
If this bill passes the Senate, then Americans will never be able to hold President Bush accountable for warrantless wiretapping.
We need to take action to stop this horrible bill. Last time immunity came up for a Senate vote, Senators Dodd, Feingold and Obama each said they would filibuster to stop it from passing. They will need 60 votes to keep a filibuster going and stop the Senate from caving to pressure to support this fake “compromise”.
Call your Senators right now and demand they support a filibuster of any Senate bill that will ultimately grant retroactive immunity to telecoms who spied on innocent Americans.
Barbara Boxer
(202) 224-3553
Dianne Feinstein
(202) 224-3841
Suggested Text:
“I calling to demand Senator (Boxer or Feinstein) support a filibuster of any bill that will ultimately grant immunity to telecommunications companies who spied on innocent Americans. Can I count on the Senator to stand up to President Bush and his fear mongering?”
Let’s call a spade a spade. This bill is a complete capitulation to Bush and the telecom lobby. We need all the support we can get in this fight to uphold the constitution.
The vote is scheduled to happen this week. We need to act today. Please make your call right now.
No Immunity for Telecoms that Illegally Spy on US!
Last Friday, the House of Representatives granted de facto amnesty to the phone companies who cooperated with the Bush administration’s illegal spying on American citizens. Our final opportunity to prevent this from becoming law lies with the Senate. We must stop the Senate from making the same terrible decision, a decision that chips away at one of our most fundamental and progressive values-the right to privacy.
Please call your senators right now and tell them to vote against any bill that lets the Bush administration and these telecom companies off the hook for shredding the constitution.
We cannot let the Senate give the phone companies and the Bush administration a free ride for past and future violations of our basic civil liberties. If we join together and ask our Senators to stop this bill by supporting a filibuster and voting NO against a bill that gives the phone companies amnesty, we can protect our privacy rights from this assault by conservative forces in Congress.
Call Your Senators Today.
The Senate switchboard is (202) 224-3121 (see below for a list of direct numbers). Tell them your state and ask them to connect you to your senator. Be sure to speak with both senators from your state. When you complete your calls, let us know what happened using this report form.
In addition to giving phone companies a free pass, this bill fails to restore adequate judicial review for future surveillance, which will continue to put our privacy rights at risk. Protecting our privacy rights is a core progressive value. Don’t let them slip away. Take action by calling your senator today. And don’t forget to report back to us.
Thanks,
Alan and the CAPAF advocacy team
P.S. We are excited to tell you that we will soon be launching our new advocacy website, IAmProgress.org. IAmProgress.org will be the home to all future CAPAF advocacy campaigns. So look out for the announcement and help us make IAmProgress.org a success.
Direct Phone Numbers to Senators (Listed by State)
[…]
California
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D) (202) 224-3553; (202)228-2382
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D) (202) 224-3841; 228-3954
On Friday, House Democrats caved to the Bush administration and passed a bill giving a get-out-of-jail-free card to phone companies that helped Bush illegally spy on innocent Americans.1
This Monday, the fight moves to the Senate. Senator Russ Feingold says the “deal is not a compromise; it is a capitulation.”2 Barack Obama announced his partial support for the bill, but said, “It does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses.”3
Last year, after phone calls from MoveOn members and others, Obama went so far as to vow to “support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies.”4 We need him to honor that promise.
Can you call Senator Obama today and tell him you’re counting on him to keep his word? Ask him to block any compromise that includes immunity for phone companies that helped Bush break the law.
Obama’s presidential campaign: (866) 675-2008
Then, help us track our progress by clicking here:
These companies helped the Bush Administration illegally spy on the emails and phone calls of innocent Americans. By giving “immunity” to these companies, all lawsuits brought against them by civil liberties groups would be thrown out of court. That means we may never find out how far Bush went in breaking the law. And once it’s done, it can’t be undone. That’s why we need Obama to promise to block any bill that has immunity.
Supporters of the House bill say it doesn’t guarantee immunity-it just kicks the issue to a court to decide. But that’s deceptive. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) points out:
“It gives [Bush’s] attorney general the power to decide if cases against telecommunications companies will proceed. The AG only has to certify to the FISA court that the company didn’t spy or did so with a permission slip from the president. A note from the president is not a legal defense. Allowing phone companies to avoid litigation by simply presenting a ‘permission slip’ from the president is not court review.”5
The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a non-profit group working with the ACLU to hold these companies accountable, adds, “whatever gloss might be put on it, the so-called ‘compromise’ on immunity for phone companies that broke the law is anything but a compromise…no matter how they spin it, this is still immunity, period.”6
President Bush and the phone companies know that the facts are against them. A judge appointed by President Bush’s father already wrote one opinion finding that “AT&T cannot seriously contend that a reasonable entity in its position could have believed that the alleged domestic dragnet was legal.”7
But we’ll never know how far their illegal actions went unless we fight back now. Can you tell Barack Obama you’re counting on him to keep his word and block any compromise that gives immunity to lawbreaking phone companies?
Obama’s presidential campaign: (866) 675-2008
Then, help us track our progress by clicking here:
Despite the outrage coming from a broad coalition of concerned citizens, by tomorrow night the House of Representatives will vote on whether or not to gut the Constitution and give immunity to phone companies who broke the law and spied on Americans.
We have to act now. Even if you’ve emailed, called or visited your members of Congress about FISA, we need you to contact them again today.
Congress is moving so fast and so secretively that we only got a copy of this bill this morning. I can tell you it’s horrible. It contains vacuum cleaner style surveillance that sweeps up the phone calls and emails of Americans. And it’s blatantly unconstitutional.
The bottom line is that this is legislation that benefits a few of our country’s largest corporations while taking away basic rights from the rest of us. And it is unacceptable.
I’m going to spend the rest of the day on the phone calling Capitol Hill trying to stop this bill. I hope you will spend whatever time you can to make the voice of freedom heard in Congress — make calls, ask your friends and family to call — please do whatever you can.
Put Congress on notice that the American people don’t want a “compromise” that sells out our rights. Act now. We’re hearing the vote is tomorrow, so we could have less than 24 hours.
Believe me, no matter what happens, the ACLU will continue fighting this — if necessary, in the courts.
Thank you for all you have done through this fight. Your dedication has truly inspired me and all of us at the ACLU. Now, let’s hit the phones!
Disclosure: I do some work with our friends at the Courage Campaign
The effort moving in the California Democratic Party to officially Censure Senator Dianne Feinstein that is being lead by the Courage Campaign, the Executive Board of the California Democratic Party Progressive Caucus, Progressive Democrats of America, East Bay for Democracy Democratic Club, Wellstone Democratic Renewal Club, San Diego Democracy for America, and Sacramento for Democracy is clearly resonating online.
With the traffic on these blogs and the volume of email being sent, I’d predict around 100,000 California grassroots Democrats will know of the censure movement by the end of the day and that number could easily triple by this weekend’s vote. And it isn’t just the raw numbers, which really are astonishing. It is also the degree to which the message of accountability is resonating with Democrats.
This is a defining moment for the California Democratic Party and there will be a lot of people watching what happens.
Progressives are angry with Dianne Feinstein to a degree that I’ve never seen before. She followed up the Leslie Southwick nomination with the Michael Mukasey nomination, and this week she may tip the balance on telecom immunity in the Senate Judiciary Committee. This weekend, at the California Democratic Party executive board meeting, she may get a reprimand.
One day after voting to elevate a divisive conservative judge to the federal appeals court in New Orleans, President Bush invited California Sen. Dianne Feinstein aboard Air Force One to survey the damage from the recent spate of Southern California wildfires.
The senator later remarked privately that she found her conversation with Bush aboard Air Force One “illuminating,” a source close to Feinstein told the Huffington Post […]
Now, a coalition of progressive Democrats upset with Feinstein’s controversial votes will ask the California Democratic Party to censure her at its executive board meeting this weekend, the Huffington Post has learned.
The move comes as Feinstein again finds herself under fire for saying Thursday that she now supports granting legal immunity to telecom companies that shared customer email and phone messages with the federal government as part of the warrantless surveillance program.
“Dianne Feinstein does not listen to the people of California,” said Rick Jacobs, president of the Courage Campaign, a progressive organization in California. “She supports George Bush’s agenda time after time.”
Knowing what I know about the e-board, this is not likely to pass. And if it did, it’s not likely to mean anything or change any opinion. But it’s a symbol of exactly how upset the grassroots is with Feinstein, and how they are grasping for something to express their disapproval.
The resolution text is on the flip.
Whereas Senator Dianne Feinstein voted to support the nomination of Judge Michael Mukasey as United States Attorney General, thereby elevating to the highest position in law enforcement a man who refused to renounce the right of the President to resort to torture and who refused to recognize waterboarding as a form of torture, and by this action Senator Feinstein failed to oppose President Bush and failed to stand for the ideals of the Democratic Party, which abhors torture and stands firmly against its use by the United States at all times and places; and
Whereas Senator Feinstein voted to confirm Judge Leslie Southwick for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit despite his clear record of racism and gender discrimination, thus failing to stand firmly with the Democratic Party, which supports gender equality and opposes racism in any of its manifestations; and
Whereas these examples are far from the only instances where Senator Feinstein, after seeking and securing the support and endorsement of the California Democratic Party, has failed to support the policies and principles of our party
Therefore be it resolved that the California Democratic Party expresses its disappointment at, and censure of, Senator Feinstein for ignoring Democratic principles and falling so far below the standard of what we expect of our elected officials.
Democratic Leader Pelosi is behaving in inexplicable ways for someone who wants to lead the Democratic Caucus:
1) Congresswoman Pelosi is supporting the regulation of blogs (and by extension any form of online activism or reporting) under the campaign finance laws. No other media outlet is regulated. It’s astonishing that she would do this, given that blogs are one of the few places that there is a strong pro-Democrat pro-liberal message, and that the blogs have gone to bat for Pelosi over and over again.
2) Congresswoman Pelosi is criticizing Senator Feingold’s proposal to censure George Bush for breaking the law by wiretapping American citizens without a warrant. This is an issue which (a) has a tremendous amount of support from the Democratic base, (b) has a plurality of support from the American people in general, and (c) is simply not in her scope of responsibility.
If you live in SF, Nancy Pelosi answers to you. Call her offices today. (Try to be nice. The staffer is probably just as frustrated as you are.)
