Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington (CREW) has launched a new campaign website called Fix the FEC. Since early this year, the Federal Election Commission has been without a quorum of its commissioners (there are only two of the normal six commissioners), rendering many of it's regulatory responsibilities useless.
Fix the FEC is very well-designed and easy to use. First and foremost, it asks the public to send a letter to US Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell to let the senate vote in new commissioners to return the FEC to quorum. You can send your letter right from the site's homepage. Then, you can send a letter to your family and friends about the campaign from another webpage. Background information about the current FEC crisis, its latest news and an FEC violation tipline are also easily located on Fix the FEC.
I highly recommend you participate with CREW using this great activist campaign website, Fix the FEC.
Showing posts with label Mitch McConnell. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mitch McConnell. Show all posts
Thursday, May 01, 2008
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Call U.S. Senators Bunning and McConnell for presidential records reform
Over the course of his one and a half terms as president, George W. Bush has written into law a record number of Executive Orders. These orders are solely the work of our president, yet there are some of them enacted that are very controversial to segments of the American public. OpenTheGovernment.org is running a netroots campaign to help overturn those that concern the openness of presidential records of the present and former presidents:
The Presidential Records Act, enacted in 1978 following the Watergate scandal and the resignation of President Nixon, established that presidential records belong to the American people, not to the president. The Act gave custody of the records to the Archivist of the United States, established that records should be released to the public 12 years after the end of a presidential administration, and recognized presidential authority to assert executive privilege. On January 18, 1989, President Reagan, the first president to whom the Presidential Records Act applied, issued Executive Order 12667. The order established a process to deal with potential executive privilege claims.
In November 2001, President Bush issued Executive Order 13233, overturning the Reagan E.O. and giving current and former presidents and vice presidents broad authority to withhold presidential records or delay their release indefinitely. E.O. 13233 requires the incumbent president to sustain the executive privilege claim of a former president unless a court order is issued to reject the claim. The E.O. also gives "designees" of the former president the right to assert privilege, allowing relatives and others to delay the release of the president's records. Also under the Bush E.O., the Archivist must wait for both the current and former president to review the records to be released, which could lead to indefinite stalling. As recently reported by the New York Sun, President Clinton is accusing the current Bush administration of delaying the release of the former president's records. In late September Mr. Clinton said, "I want to open my presidential records more rapidly than the law requires, and the current administration has slowed down the opening of my own records."
Legislation currently being held up in the Senate would nullify the Bush executive order and establish procedures for the timely release of records. The "Presidential Records Act Amendments of 2007" (H.R. 1255; House Report 110-44) would reverse the Bush E.O. by establishing a deadline for the review of records, limiting the authority of former presidents to withhold records, requiring the president to make privilege claims personally, and eliminating the ability for Vice Presidents to assert executive privilege claims over vice presidential records. On March 14, 2007, by a vote of 333-93, the U.S. House of Representatives approved H.R. 1255. The legislation is currently being held up in the Senate by Sen. Jim Bunning [R-KY]. On September 24, Sen. Bunning objected to floor consideration of the bill, but did not state the reasons for his opposition.
On October 1, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly rejected part of President Bush's 2001 executive order in a civil lawsuit filed by the American Historic Association. The judge struck down the section of the E.O. that allows a former president to indefinitely delay the release of records.
In comments on the Senate floor on October 15, Sen. Jeff Bingaman [D-NM], the sponsor of the Senate version of the bill (S. 866), spoke of the need to pass H.R. 1255. He said, "The people of this Nation hired the President. His work is undertaken on behalf of the people. Can anyone doubt that the Nation is made stronger and our Government and the electorate are better served by the study of the actions of past Presidents?"
TAKE ACTION: Call Sens. Bunning and McConnell to ask them to allow the presidential records reform bill (H.R. 1255) to come to the Senate floor for a vote.
The Presidential Records Act, enacted in 1978 following the Watergate scandal and the resignation of President Nixon, established that presidential records belong to the American people, not to the president. The Act gave custody of the records to the Archivist of the United States, established that records should be released to the public 12 years after the end of a presidential administration, and recognized presidential authority to assert executive privilege. On January 18, 1989, President Reagan, the first president to whom the Presidential Records Act applied, issued Executive Order 12667. The order established a process to deal with potential executive privilege claims.
In November 2001, President Bush issued Executive Order 13233, overturning the Reagan E.O. and giving current and former presidents and vice presidents broad authority to withhold presidential records or delay their release indefinitely. E.O. 13233 requires the incumbent president to sustain the executive privilege claim of a former president unless a court order is issued to reject the claim. The E.O. also gives "designees" of the former president the right to assert privilege, allowing relatives and others to delay the release of the president's records. Also under the Bush E.O., the Archivist must wait for both the current and former president to review the records to be released, which could lead to indefinite stalling. As recently reported by the New York Sun, President Clinton is accusing the current Bush administration of delaying the release of the former president's records. In late September Mr. Clinton said, "I want to open my presidential records more rapidly than the law requires, and the current administration has slowed down the opening of my own records."
Legislation currently being held up in the Senate would nullify the Bush executive order and establish procedures for the timely release of records. The "Presidential Records Act Amendments of 2007" (H.R. 1255; House Report 110-44) would reverse the Bush E.O. by establishing a deadline for the review of records, limiting the authority of former presidents to withhold records, requiring the president to make privilege claims personally, and eliminating the ability for Vice Presidents to assert executive privilege claims over vice presidential records. On March 14, 2007, by a vote of 333-93, the U.S. House of Representatives approved H.R. 1255. The legislation is currently being held up in the Senate by Sen. Jim Bunning [R-KY]. On September 24, Sen. Bunning objected to floor consideration of the bill, but did not state the reasons for his opposition.
On October 1, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly rejected part of President Bush's 2001 executive order in a civil lawsuit filed by the American Historic Association. The judge struck down the section of the E.O. that allows a former president to indefinitely delay the release of records.
In comments on the Senate floor on October 15, Sen. Jeff Bingaman [D-NM], the sponsor of the Senate version of the bill (S. 866), spoke of the need to pass H.R. 1255. He said, "The people of this Nation hired the President. His work is undertaken on behalf of the people. Can anyone doubt that the Nation is made stronger and our Government and the electorate are better served by the study of the actions of past Presidents?"
TAKE ACTION: Call Sens. Bunning and McConnell to ask them to allow the presidential records reform bill (H.R. 1255) to come to the Senate floor for a vote.
Friday, September 28, 2007
Call U.S. Senators Ensign and McConnell to remove bill amendment
The Sunshine Foundation is asking the netroots reform community to call U.S. Senators Ensign and McConnell and have them remove an unrelated amendment to the Senate electronic filing bill. Here's their story:
Ensign Refuses to Yield, Admits Working With McConnell
Sen. John Ensign continues to transparently block the electronic filing bill by refusing to back down from a ridiculous amendment requiring outside groups filing ethics complaints to reveal their funding sources. In stating his refusal to yield Ensign also admitted that he is working with Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, the author of this absurd amendment, to block passage of the electronic filing bill. The Hill reports, "Ensign added that he consulted with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) before deciding on his strategy, deeming the push for the amendment 'something we did together … we discussed it. I felt it was a good idea for me to do it.'" (Emphasis added.) McConnell has stated previously, including in the last few days, that he supports the electronic filing bill. It appears that he is being far less than honest.
Ensign and McConnell should do the senatorial thing and step out of the way as Sen. Bob Bennett did when he tried to offer a poison pill amendment. Rules Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein has offered Ensign a fair hearing in her committee on his amendment in exchange for dropping his objection to electronic filing. It's time for Ensign and McConnell to stop blocking transparency legislation.
In regards to the Ensign/McConnell amendment itself there are serious legal questions that appear to make it and illegal attempt to infringe on certain groups' privacy. Adam Bonin summarized the legal issues yesterday in a post at Daily Kos:
What can we say about this proposal? Of course it's not germane to this innocuous, bipartisan legislation, but what's more is that it's pretty blatantly unconstitutional. In a series of cases from the civil rights era including NAACP v Alabama and Bates v. City of Little Rock, the Supreme Court has made clear that such compelled disclosure – or "outing" – of supporters of a political organization is anathema to democracy, as it subjects members to potential harassment or retaliation and infringes on their constitutional rights of association, and must be supported by a compelling state interest.
Tell Ensign and McConnell to stop blocking transparency.
Sen. John Ensign: (202) 224-6244
Sen. Mitch McConnell: (202) 224-2541
Paul Blumenthal's blog Written by Paul Blumenthal on September 28, 2007 - 11:17am.
Ensign Refuses to Yield, Admits Working With McConnell
Sen. John Ensign continues to transparently block the electronic filing bill by refusing to back down from a ridiculous amendment requiring outside groups filing ethics complaints to reveal their funding sources. In stating his refusal to yield Ensign also admitted that he is working with Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, the author of this absurd amendment, to block passage of the electronic filing bill. The Hill reports, "Ensign added that he consulted with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) before deciding on his strategy, deeming the push for the amendment 'something we did together … we discussed it. I felt it was a good idea for me to do it.'" (Emphasis added.) McConnell has stated previously, including in the last few days, that he supports the electronic filing bill. It appears that he is being far less than honest.
Ensign and McConnell should do the senatorial thing and step out of the way as Sen. Bob Bennett did when he tried to offer a poison pill amendment. Rules Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein has offered Ensign a fair hearing in her committee on his amendment in exchange for dropping his objection to electronic filing. It's time for Ensign and McConnell to stop blocking transparency legislation.
In regards to the Ensign/McConnell amendment itself there are serious legal questions that appear to make it and illegal attempt to infringe on certain groups' privacy. Adam Bonin summarized the legal issues yesterday in a post at Daily Kos:
What can we say about this proposal? Of course it's not germane to this innocuous, bipartisan legislation, but what's more is that it's pretty blatantly unconstitutional. In a series of cases from the civil rights era including NAACP v Alabama and Bates v. City of Little Rock, the Supreme Court has made clear that such compelled disclosure – or "outing" – of supporters of a political organization is anathema to democracy, as it subjects members to potential harassment or retaliation and infringes on their constitutional rights of association, and must be supported by a compelling state interest.
Tell Ensign and McConnell to stop blocking transparency.
Sen. John Ensign: (202) 224-6244
Sen. Mitch McConnell: (202) 224-2541
Paul Blumenthal's blog Written by Paul Blumenthal on September 28, 2007 - 11:17am.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)