Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Glen Greenwald: Are House Democrats about to block Obama's new secrecy law?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-05-09 09:53 AM
Original message
Glen Greenwald: Are House Democrats about to block Obama's new secrecy law?
Are House Democrats about to block Obama's new secrecy law?


Earlier this week, I noted that the Senate had passed -- with Obama's support -- a pernicious amendment to the spending supplemental bill, jointly sponsored by Sens. Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman, that empowers Obama and the Pentagon, at their sole discretion, to suppress any "photograph taken between September 11, 2001 and January 22, 2009 relating to the treatment of individuals engaged, captured, or detained after September 11, 2001, by the Armed Forces of the United States in operations outside of the United States." The amendment has no purpose other than to expressly allow the President to conceal evidence of war crimes (torture) and to block the Supreme Court from ruling (as two federal courts have already held) that the Freedom of Information Act compels disclosure of those photographs. For more on why this new secrecy law is so dangerous, see my post here; even The Washington Post Editorial Page excoriated the amendment and Obama's support for it.

When I wrote about this several days ago, the Senate had passed the Graham-Lieberman secrecy law as an amendment to the spending supplemental bill (which includes funding for Iraq and Afghanistan) without even bothering to take a formal roll call vote (on a voice vote). Although the House version of the supplemental bill did not contain this amendment, it was widely expected that it would simply be inserted in the House-Senate conference and then easily passed along with the final bill.

But passage of Graham-Lieberman now appears much less certain because of what appears to be the refusal of some key liberal House Democrats -- including Barney Frank -- to support it. The votes of liberal House Democrats actually matter (for once) because most House Republicans are refusing to support the overall supplemental bill due to their objections to a provision for $5 billion in funding to increase the IMF's lending capacity. To pass the supplemental spending bill, House leaders need the votes of numerous House Democrats who are currently refusing to vote for anything that contains the photo suppression amendment. If Congressional Democrats succeed in blocking enactment of this amendment, that would be a critical assertion for the first time of Congressional checks on Obama's desired powers and would, independently, prevent a truly odious new secrecy power from being enacted.

more...

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/06/05/photos/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
FLAprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-05-09 10:01 AM
Response to Original message
1. That would be great if they did! But Obama will probably pull some strings and make it happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old Codger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-05-09 10:05 AM
Response to Original message
2. Hopefully
They will stick to their principals and block it , but I am not really all that confident of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GodlessBiker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-05-09 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
3. Go Barney...block that kick!! This Amendment is obscene.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-05-09 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
4. knr nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BuyingThyme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-05-09 01:40 PM
Response to Original message
5. If Obama signs this, he is a common criminal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-05-09 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Give it a rest. Are you privy to all the info he is?
I didn't think so. Constructive criticism is fine, calling my president a criminal isn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BuyingThyme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-07-09 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Wow. You're using the Bush talking points verbatim now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 07:20 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC