Hello Everyone,
I have been hearing about this bill the past couple of days. Everyone is correct when they say this is a very disturbing bill. If you have a moment, please call and email your Senators.
To Your Success,
Janna Legg
The U.S. Senate is about to take some law enforcement powers from the Justice Department, and give greater policing powers to the Department of Defense. These policing powers can (and will) be used on American soil. It appears that, under just two small sections of the National Defense Authorization Act (S. 1867). . .
1. American citizens and lawful resident aliens, could be held, INDEFINITELY, jailed.
2. Other persons can be DISAPPEARD by the military, without benefit of habeas corpus or trial. And worse...
3. These other persons can also be shipped off to a foreign judicial system that might deliver a result the Justice Department wants.
The sponsors of this bill claim that this bill contains no new powers -- that they're merely codifying the behavior of two (renegade) administrations.
Yet two of the bill's Senate backers admit there is a new power: The ability of the military to engage in police work on American soil -- Posse Comitatus be damned.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who backs the bill, indicated that the bill "basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield" and people can be imprisoned without charge or trial "American citizen or not." Another supporter, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) also declared that the bill is needed because "America is part of the battlefield."
Here's a link to a copy of the two offending sections, 1031 and 1032, which must be removed by amendment.
In 1031 the Federal State gains the power of indefinite imprisonment without trial. In 1032, American citizens and lawful resident aliens must be given civilian jails for their potentially permanent stays and cannot be shipped off for a show trial by a convenient foreign power.
The sponsors of this bill, Senators Levin and McCain, are forgetting their Article I role as a protection against an overreaching and potentially tyrannical Executive Branch, and are instead rapidly inventing powers for that branch. They're trading Liberty for Security because we've become so scared of the boogeyman.
We should stop being so cowering and fearful. We should tell Congress, loud and clear, "I Am Not Afraid."
And the debate is occurring as I write this, Monday afternoon.
Why are we getting this crucial information to you so late?
There are lots of things to monitor. DownsizeDC.org doesn't have the staff to follow all of it. Not many groups do. The Federal Leviathan is a large, unwieldy organization that moves in criminally clandestine ways. We've addressed this fact . . .
* This bill is over 600 pages long, and even according to its sponsors, covers a wide variety of issues. Something as important and unique as criminal justice should not be part of a military authorization bill, but should be the subject of its own bill, consistent with DownsizeDC.org's "One Subject at a Time Act."
* And these offending sections of this bill didn't come to light until the ACLU published an article about it on the day before Thanksgiving. http://www.aclu.org/blog/tag/Carl%20Levin We found out about that article on Friday night. Every bill should be published online, after the entire bill has been read aloud to the Congress, for at least seven days before its final vote. These provisions of DownsizeDC.org's "Read the Bills Act" would give watchdog groups and media personalities time to digest and disseminate the information to you, with sufficient time to register your dissent.
When we first read 1031 and 1032, we didn't understand them fully. We believe due diligence is important. We wanted to make sure that WE were telling the truth, not someone else's incomplete opinion or ill-advised version. That's one reason you read the Downsizer-Dispatch, isn't it?
But it was hard to find adequate help to understand how these sections related to each other, on a holiday weekend -- a weekend where our staff was also, "over the river and through the woods."
We didn't figure out how these sections related to each other until today.
Usually, we prepare our Dispatches the evening in advance, and sometimes even days earlier. Why? Because we want to be sure they're properly researched, accurate, and tightly written. We don't ever want to waste your time.
But you're reading something, today, that's been written in a hurry, just moments before it hit your inbox.
I cannot express, in polite words, how frustrated I am with the Senate Armed Services Committee, which brought this bill to the floor. Nor can I quantify how much it has bothered me, this weekend (when I should've been enjoying myself), that we might not be able to get this seemingly crucial news to you.
One sacrifice I've had to make in this hurriedly sent Dispatch is that there's insufficient time to write a sample letter. In this Dispatch, we've linked to the,
* The "I Am Not Afraid" campaign
* The "One Subject at a Time Act" campaign
* The "Read the Bills Act" campaign
You can borrow from the points we've made in this message, and send an appropriate message from each of these campaigns. I hope you will.
But even more important, if you're logged in, you can refer to Your Downsize DC Toolbox, on the home page of the DownsizeDC.org, on the link above your state map, labeled "District Information," and you'll see the phone numbers of your two Senators.
* Make a brief note of what you want to say so that your thoughts are organized.
* Be polite but firm, and be sure to identify yourself as a constituent.
* Be especially sure to tell them to remove Sections 1031 and 1032 from S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act, which has been placed on the Senate calendar.
* Then, call the numbers we provide on that page and give whoever answers your message.
Thank you for your prompt action,
Jim Babka
President
DownsizeDC.org, Inc.
P.S. By the way, both the Justice Department and the Defense Secretary oppose these provisions, and find them unhelpful. The President has even hinted at vetoing the bill, meaning we can win if we act
Showing posts with label national police force. Show all posts
Showing posts with label national police force. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Sun Journal Letter to the Editor by CCTA Vice Chairman, Nancy Murdoch
Unions
March 02, 2011 10:13 PM
I saw “Norma Rae,” read “How Green Was My Valley” and a number of other books about unions and the abuses workers suffered in the history of our country and the world. Unions have played an instrumental part in leveling the playing field for workers, especially in the United States. However, the unions played their part in creating the “Rust Belt,” empty textile mills, and outsourcing of jobs. As often is the case, those with the most power overuse that power and the pendulum swings in the opposite direction. Union bosses often have become wealthy, corrupt, powerful, and wield that power politically. Often the worker still loses.
With many states (and the nation) in debt up to their eyeballs, the rubber has met the road. Unions are fighting for their very survival in the Midwest. But is survival, especially public service unions, in the best interest of the American taxpayer in this point in history? Or is only in the best interest of the unions and their cronies?
Public service union members make about 45 percent more money than the private sector, get better benefits, have greater job security and retire earlier than their private counterparts — all on the taxpayers’ dime. Even FDR (certainly no one’s idea of a right winger) said that public service unions were “unthinkable and intolerable.”
The state of Wisconsin’s proposals seems reasonable: employees’ contribution to health care to rise from 6 percent to 12 percent, plus some contribution to their own pension plans, and unions will collect their own dues (instead of the state deducting them from paychecks). Wages could still be negotiated, and most other workplace grievances are part of law (Civil Service and Equal Employment Laws) and will protect the workers.
In 2008 the federal government provided over $600 million to Wisconsin for education. But according to 2009 records, only 32 percent of Wisconsin 8th graders earned a “proficient” reading rate (2 percent were advanced readers) and the other 66 percent were rated basic or below basic. But because of the power of the union, poor teachers are almost impossible to fire as seniority has more value than merit. Even though Wisconsin spends a huge amount per student, the results are a sorry return on the dollar. I don’t expect the scores to improve this year as in the last several weeks, many students have had a substitute teacher or none at all, as rallying at the state House and grounds was more important than teaching.
The demands of the unions and their workers are spreading to many other states, as the states find themselves slaves to a political system that has failed to see where their selfishness and greed are leading. The laws of economics are always true: you can’t spend more than you earn, whether you are an individual, county, state, or federal government.
I, as most Americans, value our police, firefighters and teachers. I want them to make a decent wage, and have fair benefits. However, we are all in this together, or at least should be. United we stand, divided we fall. Are the unions and their strong arm tactics going to divide this country once and for all?
Nancy Murdoch
Havelock
http://www.newbernsj.com/articles/saw-95363-unions-.html
March 02, 2011 10:13 PM
I saw “Norma Rae,” read “How Green Was My Valley” and a number of other books about unions and the abuses workers suffered in the history of our country and the world. Unions have played an instrumental part in leveling the playing field for workers, especially in the United States. However, the unions played their part in creating the “Rust Belt,” empty textile mills, and outsourcing of jobs. As often is the case, those with the most power overuse that power and the pendulum swings in the opposite direction. Union bosses often have become wealthy, corrupt, powerful, and wield that power politically. Often the worker still loses.
With many states (and the nation) in debt up to their eyeballs, the rubber has met the road. Unions are fighting for their very survival in the Midwest. But is survival, especially public service unions, in the best interest of the American taxpayer in this point in history? Or is only in the best interest of the unions and their cronies?
Public service union members make about 45 percent more money than the private sector, get better benefits, have greater job security and retire earlier than their private counterparts — all on the taxpayers’ dime. Even FDR (certainly no one’s idea of a right winger) said that public service unions were “unthinkable and intolerable.”
The state of Wisconsin’s proposals seems reasonable: employees’ contribution to health care to rise from 6 percent to 12 percent, plus some contribution to their own pension plans, and unions will collect their own dues (instead of the state deducting them from paychecks). Wages could still be negotiated, and most other workplace grievances are part of law (Civil Service and Equal Employment Laws) and will protect the workers.
In 2008 the federal government provided over $600 million to Wisconsin for education. But according to 2009 records, only 32 percent of Wisconsin 8th graders earned a “proficient” reading rate (2 percent were advanced readers) and the other 66 percent were rated basic or below basic. But because of the power of the union, poor teachers are almost impossible to fire as seniority has more value than merit. Even though Wisconsin spends a huge amount per student, the results are a sorry return on the dollar. I don’t expect the scores to improve this year as in the last several weeks, many students have had a substitute teacher or none at all, as rallying at the state House and grounds was more important than teaching.
The demands of the unions and their workers are spreading to many other states, as the states find themselves slaves to a political system that has failed to see where their selfishness and greed are leading. The laws of economics are always true: you can’t spend more than you earn, whether you are an individual, county, state, or federal government.
I, as most Americans, value our police, firefighters and teachers. I want them to make a decent wage, and have fair benefits. However, we are all in this together, or at least should be. United we stand, divided we fall. Are the unions and their strong arm tactics going to divide this country once and for all?
Nancy Murdoch
Havelock
http://www.newbernsj.com/articles/saw-95363-unions-.html
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Dismantling America
Thomas Sowell: Dismantling America
Just one year ago, would you have believed that an unelected government official, not even a Cabinet member confirmed by the Senate but simply one of the many "czars" appointed by the President, could arbitrarily cut the pay of executives in private businesses by 50 percent or 90 percent?
Did you think that another "czar" would be talking about restricting talk radio? That there would be plans afloat to subsidize newspapers-- that is, to create a situation where some newspapers' survival would depend on the government liking what they publish?
Did you imagine that anyone would even be talking about having a panel of so-called "experts" deciding who could and could not get life-saving medical treatments?
Scary as that is from a medical standpoint, it is also chilling from the standpoint of freedom. If you have a mother who needs a heart operation or a child with some dire medical condition, how free would you feel to speak out against an administration that has the power to make life and death decisions about your loved ones?
Does any of this sound like America?
How about a federal agency giving school children material to enlist them on the side of the president? Merely being assigned to sing his praises in class is apparently not enough.
How much of America would be left if the federal government continued on this path? President Obama has already floated the idea of a national police force, something we have done without for more than two centuries.
We already have local police forces all across the country and military forces for national defense, as well as the FBI for federal crimes and the National Guard for local emergencies. What would be the role of a national police force created by Barack Obama, with all its leaders appointed by him? It would seem more like the brown shirts of dictators than like anything American.
How far the President will go depends of course on how much resistance he meets. But the direction in which he is trying to go tells us more than all his rhetoric or media spin.
Barack Obama has not only said that he is out to "change the United States of America," the people he has been associated with for years have expressed in words and deeds their hostility to the values, the principles and the people of this country.
Jeremiah Wright said it with words: "God damn America!" Bill Ayers said it with bombs that he planted. Community activist goons have said it with their contempt for the rights of other people.
Among the people appointed as czars by President Obama have been people who have praised enemy dictators like Mao, who have seen the public schools as places to promote sexual practices contrary to the values of most Americans, to a captive audience of children.
Those who say that the Obama administration should have investigated those people more thoroughly before appointing them are missing the point completely. Why should we assume that Barack Obama didn't know what such people were like, when he has been associating with precisely these kinds of people for decades before he reached the White House?
Nothing is more consistent with his lifelong patterns than putting such people in government-- people who reject American values, resent Americans in general and successful Americans in particular, as well as resenting America's influence in the world.
Any miscalculation on his part would be in not thinking that others would discover what these stealth appointees were like. Had it not been for the Fox News Channel, these stealth appointees might have remained unexposed for what they are. Fox News is now high on the administration's enemies list.
Nothing so epitomizes President Obama's own contempt for American values and traditions like trying to ram two bills through Congress in his first year-- each bill more than a thousand pages long-- too fast for either of them to be read, much less discussed. That he succeeded only the first time says that some people are starting to wake up. Whether enough people will wake up in time to keep America from being dismantled, piece by piece, is another question-- and the biggest question for this generation.
http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2009/10/27/dismantling_america/page/full#
Thomas Sowell's Biography Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of The Housing Boom and Bust.
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Thomas Sowell and Townhall.com's daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
©Creators Syndicate
Just one year ago, would you have believed that an unelected government official, not even a Cabinet member confirmed by the Senate but simply one of the many "czars" appointed by the President, could arbitrarily cut the pay of executives in private businesses by 50 percent or 90 percent?
Did you think that another "czar" would be talking about restricting talk radio? That there would be plans afloat to subsidize newspapers-- that is, to create a situation where some newspapers' survival would depend on the government liking what they publish?
Did you imagine that anyone would even be talking about having a panel of so-called "experts" deciding who could and could not get life-saving medical treatments?
Scary as that is from a medical standpoint, it is also chilling from the standpoint of freedom. If you have a mother who needs a heart operation or a child with some dire medical condition, how free would you feel to speak out against an administration that has the power to make life and death decisions about your loved ones?
Does any of this sound like America?
How about a federal agency giving school children material to enlist them on the side of the president? Merely being assigned to sing his praises in class is apparently not enough.
How much of America would be left if the federal government continued on this path? President Obama has already floated the idea of a national police force, something we have done without for more than two centuries.
We already have local police forces all across the country and military forces for national defense, as well as the FBI for federal crimes and the National Guard for local emergencies. What would be the role of a national police force created by Barack Obama, with all its leaders appointed by him? It would seem more like the brown shirts of dictators than like anything American.
How far the President will go depends of course on how much resistance he meets. But the direction in which he is trying to go tells us more than all his rhetoric or media spin.
Barack Obama has not only said that he is out to "change the United States of America," the people he has been associated with for years have expressed in words and deeds their hostility to the values, the principles and the people of this country.
Jeremiah Wright said it with words: "God damn America!" Bill Ayers said it with bombs that he planted. Community activist goons have said it with their contempt for the rights of other people.
Among the people appointed as czars by President Obama have been people who have praised enemy dictators like Mao, who have seen the public schools as places to promote sexual practices contrary to the values of most Americans, to a captive audience of children.
Those who say that the Obama administration should have investigated those people more thoroughly before appointing them are missing the point completely. Why should we assume that Barack Obama didn't know what such people were like, when he has been associating with precisely these kinds of people for decades before he reached the White House?
Nothing is more consistent with his lifelong patterns than putting such people in government-- people who reject American values, resent Americans in general and successful Americans in particular, as well as resenting America's influence in the world.
Any miscalculation on his part would be in not thinking that others would discover what these stealth appointees were like. Had it not been for the Fox News Channel, these stealth appointees might have remained unexposed for what they are. Fox News is now high on the administration's enemies list.
Nothing so epitomizes President Obama's own contempt for American values and traditions like trying to ram two bills through Congress in his first year-- each bill more than a thousand pages long-- too fast for either of them to be read, much less discussed. That he succeeded only the first time says that some people are starting to wake up. Whether enough people will wake up in time to keep America from being dismantled, piece by piece, is another question-- and the biggest question for this generation.
http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2009/10/27/dismantling_america/page/full#
Thomas Sowell's Biography Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of The Housing Boom and Bust.
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Thomas Sowell and Townhall.com's daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
©Creators Syndicate
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
