John W. Warner Jr., a Virginia Republican who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, and Senator John McCain, an Arizona Republican, issued a joint statement rejecting Bush's assertion that he can waive the restrictions on the use of cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment against detainees to protect national security.
''We believe the president understands Congress's intent in passing, by very large majorities, legislation governing the treatment of detainees," the senators said. ''The Congress declined when asked by administration officials to include a presidential waiver of the restrictions included in our legislation. Our committee intends through strict oversight to monitor the administration's implementation of the new law."
Separately, the third primary sponsor of the detainee treatment law, Senator Lindsey O. Graham, Republican of South Carolina, told the Globe in a phone interview that he agreed with everything McCain and Warner said ''and would go a little bit further."
''I do not believe that any political figure in the country has the ability to set aside any . . . law of armed conflict that we have adopted or treaties that we have ratified," Graham said. ''If we go down that road, it will cause great problems for our troops in future conflicts because [nothing] is to prevent other nations' leaders from doing the same."
Mike at Acoustic Dad's Place may be encouraged to hear about this latest development. He commented on my earlier post that he was "concerned that by the time people...finally come to their senses it will be far too late." Well, Mike, these Senators have drawn a line in the sand and challenged the president, and I say it's about time.
David Golove, a New York University law professor who specializes in executive power issues, said the senators' statements "mean that the battle lines are drawn" for an escalating fight over the balance of power between the two branches of government.
"The president is pointing to his commander in chief power, claiming that it somehow gives him the power to dispense with the law when he's conducting war," Golove said. "The senators are saying: 'Wait a minute, we've gone over this. This is a law Congress has passed by very large margins, and you are compelled and bound to comply with it.'"
These Senators were elected to defend the Constitution from abuse of power. Let's hope they're serious about their obligations and not just giving the public a few sound bites. This election year is turning out to be important for many reasons, but the public needs to keep an eye on this situation and keep track of those politicians who work to keep the president's power in check. Otherwise, voters will have to take matters into their own hands and vote out those who side in favor of this abuse.
1 comment:
That is very promising news - once again thanks for keeping up to date on this.
Particularly considering this dispute involves members of both major parties in Congress - and a 90% approval from the Senate - my hope is that it will send a strong message to the President and the public that Congress is not playing politics.
I fail to comprehend how the President can continue to break the law - to say he is above the law - out of one corner of his mouth, while touting freedom and Democracy from the other.
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines hypocrisy as:
"a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not; especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion"
If this is not a text-book perfect depiction of hypocrisy, then I don't know what is.
Post a Comment