Saving Feingold: An Incrementalist Strategy

by Kagro X

Let me start out by saying that I have, at heart, no interest in censure. But my last post notwithstanding, I'll take what I can get.

Over at Daily Kos, Armando presents what he calls A Suggested Approach to Censure. I want to present my own. But to do it, I have to walk things back a bit, and recall to your attention a strategy I laid out last month.

I'll make it short and sweet.

The idea last month was to use the appearance of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales before the Judiciary Committee as a launching pad for a Sense of the Congress resolution rejecting the "administration's" interpretation of the McCain/Graham anti-torture amendments. These were amendments attached to the Defense appropriations bill, and they passed with overwhelming support and much fanfare. Bush, however, effectively nullified them with his "signing statement," again asserting that the president's "inherent powers" as a "wartime" Commander in Chief permit him to act without constraint from Congress.

Horrifying. Unconstitutional. A direct rejection of the legislative prerogative. Overt threats of dictatorship.

Congressional reaction? Zippy.

Suggestion? Senator Feingold finds himself out on a limb, in all likelihood on his own, too. So it's time to give him some company.

Given my track record on impeachment, you might be surprised to find me saying this, but I think if you follow me here, you'll see something worthwhile in it.

Senator: walk it back.

If your colleagues won't take the plunge on the FISA issue, take them where they can't logically refuse to go. Introduce a resolution to censure Bush (or take the "baby step" of a "Sense of the Senate" resolution earlier suggested) for his unconstitutional refusal to acknowledge and faithfully execute the expressed will of Congress with respect to the anti-torture amendments.

In your corner: the Congressional Record, showing 90 Senators voting in favor.

Now, it may well be the case for many of them -- indeed, you should expect it to be so -- that though they cannot logically refuse to follow you, refuse they will. Clearly, that won't bother you. But I suggest that the numbers of Republicans who won't follow you will compare "favorably" with the number of Democrats.

Imagine yourself on "Meet the Press" next weekend, being grilled on your current censure resolution, and asked why nobody has come out to support you.

"I don't know, Tim," you might respond. "But I note that when it comes to asserting Congressional independence from this president, Republicans haven't even been willing to come out to support the torture ban they passed 90-9. I guess they were for it before they were against it."

I'll bet that changes some minds on the FISA issue, too. Even on your side of the aisle.

Comments

[John Casper]

Kagro, I was very happy to see this post. After reading your earlier post, I thought the best thing for me to do was to refrain from commenting.
Yesterday in his Washington Sketch, Dana Milbank wrote: “At a time when Democrats had Bush on the ropes over Iraq, the budget and port security, Feingold single-handedly turned the debate back to an issue where Bush has the advantage -- and drove another wedge through his party.”
Here's what Milbank is referring to, here's what Feingold said in his call for censure: “No one questions whether the government should wiretap suspected terrorists. Of course we should, and we can under current law.”
I emailed Milbank: "No wonder Democrats and Republicans are “running away” from Censure, Dana Milbank and the rest of the “corporate media” print “Bush has the advantage,” when anyone says: “No one questions whether the government should wiretap suspected terrorists. Of course we should, and we can under current law.”
This isn't about Republican or Democrat, it's about preserving the "rule of law." Porter Goss and the necons are going to try to CONVICT Dana Priest, James Reisen, and their sources of TREASON for the NSA links. The corporate media won't be able to cover the story, because everything is "classified." Since Priest and Reisen don't work for DeadEye's outlet, FOXNEWS, he's not going to "declassify" anything for them.
Feingold's censure motion is about as mainstream as it gets, the rule of law.

[Mimikatz]

This makes a great deal of sense. It is also one way to repudiate Bush's nonsense about "signing statements" being some sort of equally weighted gloss interpreting the acts of Congress.

And a very large percentage of Americans support us on the torture issue. It is something we need to repudiate. Thgis also has the virtue of putting Mr Clean (McCain) on the hot seat where he belongs.

[Ducktape]

By the way, my partner just talked with Barbara Boxer's office, and was told that "she WILL be supporting Feingold's resolution." No information yet on when she would make the statement, and after my partner hung of the phone, he commented - "I should have asked if she will be publicly supporting it, or if she's going to just pat him on the back and give him an attaboy."