Silence on the Hill (editorial about giving powers to Bush) :Wash Post

[jbfam4]

Silence on the Hill . . .

Monday, January 5, 2004; Page A16

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54807-2004Jan4.html


IT IS A MATTER of grade-school civics that in American democracy laws are made by the legislative branch. Article I of the Constitution, after all, begins with the arresting statement that "All legislative powers . . . shall be vested in a Congress of the United States." Yet ever since it passed the USA Patriot Act after the events of Sept. 11, 2001, Congress has stood by in an alarming silence while a fabric of new law governing the balance between liberty and security has been woven by the other two branches of government. Many Republican members profess to be fully content with the Bush administration's handling of the war on terrorism here at home. Many Democrats, meanwhile, are happy to snipe from the sidelines but offer little in the way of constructive alternatives. Both parties harbor a few honorable exceptions. But in the main, the parties are united in their desire not to sully their hands by engaging seriously in deciding the shape of the law. They are content not to do their jobs but instead to let the Bush administration do what it pleases and take the political and judicial heat for it all.


To some extent, the administration itself deserves blame for the legislature's passivity. Rather than inviting congressional involvement, it foolishly discourages it -- both out of an ideological attachment to executive power and out of an allergy to any kind of legal restraint on its conduct. But Congress is not supposed to legislate only with the administration's permission. America, after all, is not a parliamentary democracy where the government sets the legislature's agenda. Congress is supposed to be an equal branch of government, and it ought to be both aggressively overseeing the administration's work and actively exploring what laws would enhance American freedom and security. It ought not be giving its powers away.

[displacedtexan]

1. NOW the WP is concerned?

Too little too late.

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. Hallelujah

About bloody time

When we start talking of the obvious we will move back to balance

[michaelbmoore]

3. I hope you are right

Because is we swing much farther we are going to fall off, and we won't be able to right ourseves.

[October]

4. Closing the barn door

now that the "elefant" is out.

[teryang]

5. The checks and balances are already gone

it's called dictatorship. The bfee has been operating with impunity since they took the shot at Reagan. They have never been taken to task. It's the secret unaccountable government of national security ringknockers in the intel establishment and the corporatist money gougers. Neither constituency gives a shit about constitutional government, it's been gone for a while. The death knell was when they looted the banking system in the eighties and carried out a secret illegal war financed by drugs. The same group is still in power today. I hate to say it because I know I'll get flamed but the democratic party is responsible because they didn't prosecute the Bushes en masse when they had the chance.

[jpgray]

6. Perhaps the WP should invent a "way back machine"

And take us to seven or so months ago, when this would still have had a tinge of relevance.

[Cocoa]

7. this is way too weak

It's painting them as passively going along, while really the republicans are ACTIVELY helping Bush cover up his crimes by refusing to investigate the intelligence failures.