Tweet
Action in the Senate and House this Thursday, September 17, 2009, "Constitution Day," starkly highlighted the longstanding casual disregard for self-governance, and the disrespect for one of the most fundamental prohibitions of our Constitution, that many of our federal legislators exhibit, including Party leaders like Harry Reid who direct floor action and ought to know better.
First, the (Very) Good:
Mr. REID. [...] I think it is important to say to everyone that we are now in a mode of doing some legislation. I appreciate very much the cooperation of all Senators, Democrats and Republicans. We are now in the mode of, when a bill comes up, people can offer amendments. For a number of years, that simply was not the case. When there are circumstances and a decision is made not to allow amendments, I understand, after people are in the habit of being able to offer amendments, how concerned they become. We will approach that whenever it comes about, if there is a decision made to so-called fill the tree and not allow amendments.
In the way we are working, we are taking some tough votes. Democrats are offering some difficult amendments, Republicans are offering some difficult amendments. But that is OK. We are working through these bills. We could have been voting on cloture on the Transportation appropriations bill. We could have been invoking cloture on that bill this morning. It simply has not been necessary.
We have some nominations we are still working our way through. One Republican Senator has held up a nomination for quite some time. He came to me yesterday and said: You can go ahead and put that one through.
I am satisfied and confident this is the way the Senate should operate.
We have the health care bill on the horizon. If we are able to get 60 votes to proceed to it, it is going to take everyone’s cooperation and patience to work through the amendments that will be necessary to go forward on that bill. I am hopeful and confident we can work through that bill. If not, we will have to go to reconciliation, which I hope we don’t have to do, but if we have to, we have to do that.
Anyway, I feel good about what we have been able to accomplish this week. I repeat, it sets a pattern of how we should be legislating.
Behind me is Senator Specter. He came to me a number of times last year and said: Are there going to be amendments allowed? And I said yes. He said he would vote to move forward on the bill. I think there were other people who felt the same way, but they just were not as vocal as Senator Specter.
I appreciate the good work, including that of my colleague, the senior Senator from Kentucky, who is one of the people who has stressed how important it is to have amendments. I recognize he cannot control his Senators all the time, nor can I. In spite of that, we have been able to work through legislation.
I want to get the appropriations bills done, as does Senator McConnell. He and I have been members of the Appropriations Committee during our entire tenure in the Senate. It is important that we work through these bills. As of today, we will have completed five of them. We are going to do our utmost to do the conference reports before the first of October. We may have to–not may–we will have to have a short-term CR, and by the end of that short-term CR, hopefully we can complete all the appropriations bills.
English translation for Reid’s first couple of semi-coded paragraphs in this floor statement: "Circumstances" means Party politics (too-often dictated by the White House) and the desire of Senators to avoid the accountability of casting a vote, yea or nay, on the public record. "Filling the tree" because "a decision is made" is the Majority Leader’s practice (under both Parties) of providing cover for his Party members by blocking what Reid openly admits here are (considered to be politically) "tough votes" from ever needing to be taken by the Senate. Filling the tree and allowing only a pre-selected, very limited group of amendments to receive floor debate and votes, via secretly-negotiated unanimous-consent agreements between the Party leaders, prevents the legislative and democratic process of full and fair floor debate from taking place in the Senate. It’s a way of controlling political fallout, at the expense of genuine legislating and a full hearing and debate on germane amendments any Senator wishes to offer.
For whatever reason, at least on these mostly-unnoticed, under-reported appropriations bills, Harry Reid is obliquely announcing here that the Senate has returned to being an actual legislature until further notice, after years of Party manipulation of floor proceedings. Reid states he will not abuse the process, or thwart the democratic will of the Senate, by blocking politically-sensitive amendments with negotiated deals to limit amendments on these spending bills (or with early cloture votes), and has instead opened the floor equally to all Senators to offer improvements to the bills.
And, better yet, even on an unquestionably controversial, politically-potent topic – the upcoming floor debate on health insurance reform – Harry Reid is stating that he is prepared for an open, democratic debate on the Senate floor, without a rigged game of pre-arranged 60-vote margins for passage, or severely-limited amendments. [Though the content of the consolidated bill brought to the floor of course remains hugely significant, and very much under his control.]
All germane health reform ideas would therefore be eligible for debate on the floor, and Senators will be expected to vote them up or down, or to filibuster and block filibusters, as each is considered in turn. Only after that process is given its full measure of floor time, will the possibility of reconciliation be considered, Reid indicates. So the process of reconciliation would be necessary only if some Democratic Senators betray their own Party platform, and refuse even to end debate on key amendments, or the bill itself, so as to allow their colleagues to cast their simple-majority votes – yea or nay – on particular provisions. Meaning the specious, unproven public claims that "we don’t have the votes" will finally be put to the test, in the open, on the public record, on the Senate floor.
Hear, Hear. If Reid keeps to his word, and allows the necessary time for that healthy floor debate on the Senate health care bill, the nation will see the Senate work its will – out in the open, in the democratic, fair method, as designed, of one Senator, one vote, without interference by top-down Party dictates. This is essentially the Senate acting as adults – as legislators, not just political Party pitchmen – and though it pleases the Republican minority by giving them more of a voice, it will also helpfully expose Democratic pretenders, while reducing the need for Reid to enforce Party-line conformity in an effort to reach labor-intensive, off-floor deals that try to pre-determine outcomes. So far, so good.
Now, the Bad:
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I understand that there is a bill at the desk. I ask for its first reading.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
A bill (S. 1687) to prohibit the Federal Government from awarding contracts, grants, or other agreements, or providing other Federal funds to or engaging in activities that promote the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.
Mr. REID. I ask for a second reading but object to my own request.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard. The bill will be read for the second time the next legislative day.
That was Harry Reid, also Thursday, putting through its paces a brand new (not yet printed) standalone bill, never considered in committee, in preparation for bringing it to the floor, possibly next week. The reason for this, I’m guessing, is because the ACORN-punishing Johanns amendment that the Senate passed Monday on the T-HUD appropriations bill – and again on Thursday (85-11, including Reid and Byrd) on the Interior appropriations bill – wouldn’t survive, or would complicate, conferences with the House, and Reid wants to speed through a substitute standalone bill, and/or maybe add it as an amendment to the same (student loan) bill the House likewise just amended to punish ACORN.
Which brings me to unConstitutional Bills of Attainder and Thursday’s Constitution Day House action, as described by the impressive, Constitution-respecting Rep. Jerry Nadler of New York, whose floor statement was highlighted yesterday by The Public Record:
Mr. NADLER of New York. A little while ago, the House passed an amendment to the bill that we were considering that says no contract for Federal funds may ever go to ACORN, a named organization, or to any individual organization affiliated with ACORN.
Unfortunately, this was done on the spur of the moment and nobody had the opportunity to point out that this is a flat violation of the Constitution, constituting a bill of attainder. The Constitution says Congress shall pass no bill of attainder.
The Supreme Court has ruled a bill of attainder is a legislative act that, no matter what their form, applies either to named individuals or to easily ascertainable members of a group in such a way as to inflict punishment, and then without a judicial trial. That’s exactly what this amendment does.
It may be that ACORN is guilty of various infractions, and if so, it ought to be investigated, maybe sanctioned, whatever, by the appropriate administrative agency or maybe by the judiciary. Congress must not be in the business of punishing individual organizations or people without trial.
That’s what this amendment did. It is flatly prohibited by the Constitution. And once confidence in this institution is sapped, when we ignore the Constitution, we ignore constitutional principles, that whatever one may think of the subject matter or the organization here, the Constitution and the ban on bills of attainder is there for the protection of the liberties of all of us.
It’s unfortunate that we passed this, and I certainly hope it is removed in the conference committee.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2009_record&page=H9704&position=all
Here’s that House language, as passed 345-75 [Nadler asked for time before the vote from Democratic Bill Manager George Miller - who seemed to both oppose and support Issa's Motion to Recommit - but Miller refused to yield]:
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Issa moves to recommit the bill H.R. 3221 to the Committee on Education and Labor with instructions to report the same back to the House forthwith, with the following amendment:
Add at the end the following new title (and conform the table of contents accordingly):
TITLE VI–DEFUND ACORN ACT
SECTION 601. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the "Defund ACORN Act".
SEC. 602. PROHIBITIONS ON FEDERAL FUNDS AND OTHER ACTIVITIES WITH RESPECT TO CERTAIN INDICTED ORGANIZATIONS.
(a) Prohibitions.–With respect to any covered organization, the following prohibitions apply:
(1) No Federal contract, grant, cooperative agreement, or any other form of agreement (including a memorandum of understanding) may be awarded to or entered into with the organization.
(2) No Federal funds in any other form may be provided to the organization.
(3) No Federal employee or contractor may promote in any way (including recommending to a person or referring to a person for any purpose) the organization.(b) Covered Organization.–In this section, the term "covered organization" means any of the following:
(1) Any organization that has been indicted for a violation under any Federal or State law governing the financing of a campaign for election for public office or any law governing the administration of an election for public office, including a law relating to voter registration.
(2) Any organization that had its State corporate charter terminated due to its failure to comply with Federal or State lobbying disclosure requirements.
(3) Any organization that has filed a fraudulent form with any Federal or State regulatory agency.
(4) Any organization that–
(A) employs any applicable individual, in a permanent or temporary capacity;
(B) has under contract or retains any applicable individual; or
(C) has any applicable individual acting on the organization’s behalf or with the express or apparent authority of the organization.(c) Additional Definitions.–In this section:
(1) The term "organization" includes the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (in this subsection referred to as "ACORN") and any ACORN-related affiliate.
(2) The term "ACORN-related affiliate" means any of the following:
(A) Any State chapter of ACORN registered with the Secretary of State’s office in that State.
(B) Any organization that shares directors, employees, or independent contractors with ACORN.
(C) Any organization that has a financial stake in ACORN.
(D) Any organization whose finances, whether federally funded, donor-funded, or raised through organizational goods and services, are shared or controlled by ACORN.
(3) The term "applicable individual" means an individual who has been indicted for a violation under Federal or State law relating to an election for Federal or State office.(d) Revision of Federal Acquisition Regulation.–The Federal Acquisition Regulation shall be revised to carry out the provisions of this title relating to contracts.
Compare to the first Johanns amendment [SA 2355], as passed, 83-7, by the Senate Monday:
The amendment (No. 2355), as modified, is as follows:
(Purpose: Prohibiting use of funds to fund the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN))
After section 414, insert the following:
Sec. 4__. None of the funds made available under this Act may be distributed to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) or its subsidiaries.
And to the second Johanns amendment [SA 2394], as passed, 85-11, by the Senate Thursday:
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: Prohibiting use of funds to fund the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN))
On page 240, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS
Sec. 4__. None of the funds made available under this Act may be distributed to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) or its subsidiaries.
The legislative punishment without judicial process aspect of these pieces of legislation is the selective forbidding of any ACORN application for federal grant funds from even being considered (though ACORN has not been tried in federal court, nor been convicted of breaking the law). [In other words, this isn't just about ending some purported requirement that federal grants be awarded to ACORN, by interfering in the customary course of awarding or denying federal grants, as some have mistakenly portrayed it.] Issa obviously drafted the House language more cleverly than Johanns did the Senate language, so as to pretend to be including a broader category of organizations than just the ACORN organization. But Issa’s floor remarks (and his amendment’s short title) make clear his intent.
So on Constitution Day, no less, we have an overwhelming majority of federal legislators, facilitated by their Party leaders, heedlessly voting – even setting aside the legislation’s evident lack of merit – to pass barely-debated legislation that future (costly) litigation may well determine to be, as Rep. Nadler wisely warns but proponents can’t be bothered to hear, an unConstitutional Bill of Attainder – one of the most-despised vehicles used to deny due process by the British Parliament, and a power the authors of our Constitution made doubly sure to forbid to their new nation’s federal legislature.
29 Comments
Yup, but not the first time the Congress has shown their ignorance of a disrespect for the Constitution. Most of them believe like Bush, ‘it’s just a piece of paper’.
I can add some further, helpful explanation about the new pending anti-ACORN bill, S. 1687, and what Harry Reid’s request (see “Now, the Bad:” above) for the first and second readings of it meant, thanks to Kagro X at CongressMatters.com.
First, Kagro’s link here indicates that this bill, too, was sponsored by Senator Johanns of Nebraska, has 20 cosponsors, and was introduced on 9/17, the same day Reid asked for its first and second readings (the second reading has been postponed, upon Reid’s objection, until the next legislative day, which should be Monday).
Second, the formal process that Reid is following in my excerpt from the Congressional Record above with regard to S. 1687, is part of Senate Rule 14, as Kagro/David explains here, and this part of the explanation of that rule reveals the significance of the process if Reid (as I expect) plans to and does object to further proceedings, upon the bill’s second reading on Monday, in order (counter-intuitively) to prepare the bill to be brought quickly to the floor for consideration later next week:
Thanks powwow. It’s always a good day when you post a diary.
Just a query: I thought appropriation bills couldn’t be filibustered.
As for ACORN, it is a well established Senate tradition that organizations that help the poor should be outlawed.
Hugh, I think that’s a confusion that’s arisen because budget reconciliation bills – which are much rarer – cannot be filibustered. Which, of course, as you know, is why going the reconciliation route on health care is an attractive option. People will often mistakenly use the term “appropriations,” or “authorization,” though, when they mean “reconciliation” bill.
So yes, filibusters of both authorization and appropriations bills, as opposed to reconciliation bills, are indeed possible, and not uncommon at all; in fact, the Republicans broke the two-year Senate filibuster record last December with their filibuster of the FY 2009 omnibus appropriations bill.
Thanks very much for the clarification.
ACORN started out as a good organization.
ACORN is a good organization. The meme of this phony story is to smear one the most succesful organizations actually DOING something to help the poor and working class, by finding and taping a few wierd statements by low paid,or voluteer, low lvel employees. if i spent a year and was willing to be thrown out of pizza huts all over the country, im SURE i could find 2 or 3 employees to swear on camera that the cheese is made from toenail clippings. the whole story is an irresponsible, partisan sham and never should have made it off the drudge report. that the US senate is acting on it (unconstitutionally) is beyond the pale.
BINGO! we know that the senate exists to uphold and defend the institutions and interests of the ruling class, if they could outlaw the poor themselves they would. BTW media matters has (as always) some good journalism about the whole sham ACORN story, ginned up for fox by a couple of junior nazis, then spewed hystericaly all over the air by fox as was pre ordained. before the “work” was even begun on the slander peice. Apparently, the pimp and whore responsible for the “piece” are well known to many ACORN offices around the country, having been thrown out of them over the past year, and with the filed police reports to prove it.those two reek and no responsible media outlet should have ever touched that story. In fact, the Dobbs apologist CNN’s Jonah Klein wouldnt run it. Its disgraceful that once resepctable outlets like ABC and NBC have become spigots for fox rehotorical vomit.
Great post again, pow wow. The return of a more open amendment process, as you note, is a return to real legislating with the added bonus of actually recording votes on those “difficult issues” the parties really wish would just go away.
Even though Issa tried to be clever in his bill, doesn’t 602 (b)(1) deny due process since it denies funding to indicted organizations rather than convicted organizations? What happened to innocent until proven guilty?
Another wonderful development on Constitution Day was the introduction of the JUSTICE Act in the Senate, cosponsored by Feingold, Durbin, Tester, Udall, Bingaman, Sanders, Akaka and Wyden. From Feingold’s press release:
It will be very interesting to watch the debate over undoing the granting of retroactive immunity. Proponents may well try to argue that this amounts to an ex post facto law, but the conundrum is that the practice, at the time the crimes occurred, was in fact illegal, but was then made legal by retroactive immunity–a reverse ex post facto, if you will. The new legislation would restore the original criminality to the acts. That debate should prove interesting.
Exactly, Jim.
Great points on the apparent disappearance of innocent until proven guilty in Issa’s bill, and on the timely introduction of the Feingold JUSTICE bill, with its unflinching provision to repeal the FAA’s corporate immunity from prosecution for FISA violations. If JUSTICE gets some momentum in the Senate, Obama will no doubt be working hard behind the scenes in Congress to make sure that he never has to publicly face the choice of signing or vetoing a repeal of the FAA’s retroactive immunity – a public choice which has the potential to starkly expose the difference between Obama’s talk and his walk, the same way that his votes to end the Dodd/Feingold filibuster and for final passage of the FISA Amendments Act last summer contradicted his campaign rhetoric.
“Section 602,
(b) Covered Organization.–In this section, the term “covered organization” means any of the following:
(3) Any organization that has filed a fraudulent form with any Federal or State regulatory agency.”
A “fraudulent form” is presumably a form including a materially false or fraudulent statement.
This would effectively add a federal civil sanction, in the case of fraudulent statements to a state or federal regulatory agency, to the existing federal criminal penalties for false statements to a federal government agency in a matter within that agency’s jurisdiction. Title 18, U.S. Code, Section 1001.
There would however be only a civil standard for fraudulent statements, presumably, preponderance of the evidence. But — fraudulent as adjudicated by whom or what?
What if the fraudulent statement is in a letter, or other writing, rather than in a form? Isn’t that equally deserving of sanction?
Picking another nit — follow the bouncing ball:
“(b) Covered Organization.–In [section 602], the term “covered organization” means …
(4) Any organization that–
(C) has any applicable individual acting on the organization’s behalf or with the express or apparent authority of the organization.
(c) Additional Definitions.–In this section:
(3) The term “applicable individual” means an individual who has been indicted for a violation under Federal or State law relating to an election for Federal or State office.”
Want to cut off federal funds for an organization? Not hard, for Ka*l Ro*e, it would seem.
a) Find someone who is acting with the “apparent authority” of the organization you want to defund.
b) Get him or her indicted for a state or federal election violation. It doesn’t matter, for your purposes, if the judge later throws out the case.
Eight years ago I’d never have written this. Now, alas, it is not beyond belief.
This proposed legislation has problems. Thanks for highlighting Rep. Nadler’s point about the whole enterprise’s being unconstitutional.
I’m willing to bet that at some point Halliburton or one of its subsidiaries has “filed a fraudulent form with [a] Federal or State regulatory agency.” For that matter, I’ll bet quite a few of our defense contractors have as well.
There could be some interesting unintended consequences of this language.
It would seem that due to the indictment of officials regarding the Ohio presidential vote in 2004, the Issa amendment bans the Republican National Committee and the state of Ohio in its entirety. The inclusion of state laws would ban the city of Boston, due to Mayor Curley. I think it could be improved by cutting off 602(b)(1) to read
which would effectively ban a lot of military contractors, lobbyists, talk show radio hosts, and anyone with any financial connection whatsoever to Rush Limbaugh, anyone who has ever had a moving violation that required going to court, as well as the Catholic Church, most of the evangelical churches, and AIPAC. It would be highly probable that Congressman Issa would be unable to collect his salary due to speeding tickets.
In fact, maybe there should be a provision in the bill to require members of Congress who are banned from receiving salaries under the bill in its current form, to inform the Sergeant at Arms of that fact in a loud voice on the house floor at the time of casting their votes.
An afterthought — and what was going through my morning brain when I read Congressman Issa’s bill and wrote my snarky comment: It is remarkable how close his definitions section is to the definitions and associations that are used internationally by agents of the U.S. (military, intelligence, law enforcement, or others) to operationally define material support for a terrorist organization.
Having seen attempts by commenters and various anti-gummint groups (Republican and otherwise) to try to link ACORN to terrorism, the bill is absolutely appalling. Having spent a lot of time studying and investigating the targeting of international aid agencies by the U.S. (e.g. the Bosnian Red Crescent Society) for indefinite detention and abuse of their members, it chills the blood to the bone marrow.
The two things all people in the nation have in common is that they need healthcare services at an affordable cost … and they hate being robbed. Unfortunately, the Progressive community, White House, Mainstream Media, and Congress have done (again) a terrible job of illustrating the depth and scope of fraud-waste-abuse.
If the vast majority of Americans — progressives, moderates, conservatives, and lunatics — knew how much of their tax and discretionary spending money was paying for multiple claims administration infrastructures, executive salaries, fraud fines and penalty settlements, class action litigation settlements, profits for shareholders, unnecessary and excessive medical procedures for fun and profits, insurance and hospital marketing programs, excessive and duplicative technological toys, and various financial incentives … they would be marching in concert on Congress to demand Change We Can All Believe In.
We have an EDUCATION and MARKETING problem. It is resolvable. But not with the strategy and tactical approach being utilized by ‘reformers’.
I agree. It is a tough subject to get a handle on.
This is a great post. Thank you.
My perspective is that ACORN has problems but I think we have no measure of the good it does versus the corruption it has embraced. I’m not ready to draw a conclusion based on videos made by a guy posing as a pimp aired on FOXGOP.
My question is: Why did Feingold vote for this dreck? He’s big on the Constitution. Surely, he knows what Bills of Attainder are. And I am a big Feingold fan.
i heard KBR electrocuted soldiers and blackwater engaged in black market sales of weapons in iraq and murdered civilians.
seems these are far worse activites and more widespread practices — for which there is more evidence — than the one that got ACORN carded on Capitol Hill.
the rethugs started out to demonize ACORN back in the bush years. Since Obama won they have upped their efforts. They will do anything, anything, to destroy the Obama administration. Even bringing the entire country to a standstill. They are going 1 person and one organization at a time. Every time that the dems do not call them on what they charge, they go on to their next target. Just watch and tell me if I am wrong. They will destroy both congress and Obama if they continue the way they have.
The thugs prove over and over that they will do anything to destroy Obama, yet he continues to call for bipartisanship. That is where the community organizer fails, When only one side wants to discuss, then you are screwed.
The dems in congress continue to have no spine and no balls. Esp the senate. Either that or else they have all been bought by one of the oligarchs who really control the country. The rich get richer and the poor get screwed. Thae middle class continues to shrink. In my working life we all assumed that we would do better than our parents. My kids can not assume that. Just going to college means nothing. A degree in say Art History is not even worth a cup of coffee. Those with skills needed by the corporations will get ahead, the vast majority will simply continue to slide into a life of indebtedness. The advertisers know how to push the buy buttons of the sheeple, the rethugs know how to get and keep the minds of the sheeple closed tight. As our country slowly slides into enclaves, the ideals we started with are thrown away as being meaningless. Meanwhile our kids learn nothing in HS. WE are indeed becoming a nation of idiots. I wish I had an idea about how we could save our future, but I don’t.With every year that more kids enter HS but but do not graduate(30% as of 2006) we are becoming a land of untrained people, only fit to work minimum wage jobs, forever to be on the lowest rung of society
“With every year that more kids enter HS but but do not graduate(30% as of 2006) we are becoming a land of untrained people, only fit to work minimum wage jobs, forever to be on the lowest rung of society”
meanwhile, the senate is busy criminalizing organizations that operate for the benefit of minimum wage “lowest rung” citizens.
The Senate has become a joke. The pomposity is stunning and the lack of anything resembling common sense is strange and scary. I guess if you are one of the Very Important People you don’t actually have to do something.
ondelette @ 10
Abso-fuckin’-lutely. I just *love* it when these fools demonstrate their total lack of skill and talent in doing anything with legislation but scoring political points. Except the whole country suffers. I hope someone uses this legislation in just this way to shame all these hypocrites.
ondelette @ 11
That’s exactly what was going through my mind when I was reading the lack of judicial fairness in this witch hunt: anyone they don’t like is a terrorist now, of course, and stripped of all due process, let alone fairness and common decency. Targeting, indeed. It’s a shameful legacy that spreads.
solerso @ 18
Thank you. Every decent person seeing those clips has to suspect as much. I tell you, my radar has really benefitted from some serious upgrades since I started reading FDL!
solerso @ 21
Yup, it’s a class war and we iz losin. That’s the ONLY explanation for all the double standards everywhere you look!!
powwow, this is amazing stuff just like you always deliver. Thank you so much. You provide the opportunity to review just what is going on ~ in their own words!
Reid makes me so angry ~ all those kabuki weasle-words and comity. spit.
And I don’t trust anything he says. I probably won’t trust anything he said that happens for a week after it actually happens!
Shit, Reid probably traded the unconstitutional ACORN witch hunt for the “permission” to say (only say) there would be full debate going forward. spit.
Cheers for powwow!
Does refusing to give money to someone or something constitute a punishment?
It’s a disqualification from participation in processes that are at least nominally open to all, isn’t it?
I’m interested in seeing what this bill does to ab-only sex ed funding, muahaha…
what should be of interest is how no similar “attainder” was imposed upon u.s. corporations that were caught/virtually convicted of defrauding the usg.
GE for instance. many prosecutions where the evidence of the actionable perps went up to the office of the ceo. the doj left it as civil litigation, as opposed to criminal. still, after pleading nolo[i.e., admitting guilt without admitting guilt] GE was not excluded from continuing to compete for federal contracts, federal funds.
there is boeing. grafting dod employees. the dod civil servants went to jail as i recall. there was a change of top level management at boeing[the removal of those who authorized that grafting] but the doj did not pursue criminal charges against the boeing management/bod. and boeing has not been excluded from competing for continuing federal largesse.
and lastly, to name but a few, there is GM and its Delphi spin-off and Ford and its Visteon spin-off. these were criminal acts. that no one wants to deal with. in my opinion the doj, sec went way out of their way to ignore these economic crimes. and then rewarded GM with lots of taxpayer cash.
and old harry, old nancy, and the congress wants to go after acorn. for the errors of field hands. tells you everything about the congress of the usa. all on the take. the congress is an augean stable. where is hercules?
Hadn’t thought of that, but a lot of the biggest defense contractors were indicted in Operation Ill Wind.