It's Funny When Republican Crackpots Get Mad At Each Other In Public-- Thomas Massie vs Liz Cheney

Massie and Amash

I don't think I agree with Thomas Massie (R-KY) on almost any fundamental issues. But, unlike virtually all of his Republican colleagues, I recognize that Massie is a principled guy, who acts on his conservative values rather than on the transactionalism that underlies most members of Congress' voting records. A libertarian Republican, he should have packed up and left the Republican Party when his buddy, Justin Amash did. But he didn't; he stayed on the represent the 20 counties in northeast Kentucky-- including the suburbs south of Cincinnati-- that make up the blood red (PVI is R+18) 4th district. This isn't a district that's starting to see the light like most other suburban districts from Georgia through Texas to Orange County, California; it's a district that's actually getting worse:

• Obama, 2008- 37.0%
• Obama, 2012- 34.8%
• Hillary, 2016- 29.3%

In 2016, though, Massie outpolled Trumpanzee. 71.3% of the voters cast their ballots for Massie but just 65.2% went for Trump. In 2018, Massie's share of the vote shrunk, marginally, to 62.2%, not really enough to attract the DCCC. There are two Democrats struggling to win the primary-- Alexandria Owensby and Shannon Fabert who both appear to be centrists-- but the real headlines are all about the June 23rd Republican primary challenge Massie is facing from far right sociopath Todd McMurtry. Massie's libertarian convictions sometime clash with Republican dogma. McMurtry is the kind of guy who follows along with whomever is wielding the right-wing whip. It didn't look like a serious contest-- until Massie opposed the CARES Act in late March, causing Trump to denounce him and incumbent Republicans, who were forced back to plague-ridden Washington-- to flip out. Trump said Massie should be kicked out of the GOP and tweeted that he's a "third rate grandstander." Aside from Amash, a handful of libertarian-leaning Republican defended him publicly-- Chip Roy and Paul Gosar being two standouts. But they were in the minority.

Liz Cheney (R-WY), a member of the GOP leadership, and Mike Turner (R-OH) were both so infuriated-- that they had to come back to DC-- that they each contributed to McMurtry's campaign before they realized that he's a KKK sympathizer (if not an actual member). A few Republican members denounced Cheney and Turner for coddling the racist and both Cheney and Turner asked McMurtry to return their campaign contributions.

As of December 31, Massie had raised $803,738 and McMurtry had raised a competitive $320,797. (Neither of the Democrats had hit even $30,000.) The two Republicans released negative, dueling Trump-asskissing ads. This is McMurtry's:





And here's Massie's:

The Bill, The Bill, The Bill... And, Don't Forget For A Moment That The Bill Will Come Due

The House passed the $2.2 trillion Wall Street bailout, filled with goodies for corporate America, by voice vote today-- but not before Trump lost his shit on Twitter this morning when someone told him Thomas Massie (R-KY) had decided to force a roll call vote. Here's a narrative version of Massie's tweet storm after being savaged by Señor Trumpanmzee (above), who is now likely to back Massie's very right-wing primary supporter, Todd McMurtry. "I swore an oath to uphold the constitution, and I take that oath seriously," he began. "In a few moments I will request a vote on the CARES Act which means members of Congress will vote on it by pushing 'yes' or 'no' or 'present.'" Actually, what it means is that every member of the House might have had to go on record as being for it or against it, something both Pelosi and McCarthy wanted to avoid-- and were able to. And it meant that enough members of Congress had to drag their asses back to DC to give leadership a quorum. It's Pelosi's own fault that she refused to pay attention to the Members who have been urging her to institute remote voting during the pandemic. Back to Massie:

The Constitution requires that a quorum of members be present to conduct business in the House. Right now, millions of essential, working-class Americans are still required to go to work during this pandemic such as manufacturing line workers, healthcare professionals, I am not delaying the bill like Nancy Pelosi did last week. The bill that was worked on in the Senate late last week was much better before Speaker Pelosi showed up to destroy it and add days and days to the process. This bill should have been voted on much sooner in both the Senate and House and it shouldn’t be stuffed full of Nancy Pelosi’s pork-- including $25 million for the Kennedy Center, grants for the National Endowment for the Humanities and Arts, and millions more other measures that have no direct relation to the Coronavirus Pandemic. That $25 million, for example, should go directly to purchasing test kits. The number one priority of this bill should have been to expand testing availability and creation of tests so that every American, not just the wealthy and privileged, have access to testing. We have shut down the world’s economy without adequate data. Everyone, even those with no symptoms, needs immediate access to a test. This bill creates even more secrecy around a Federal Reserve that still refuses to be audited. It allows the Federal Reserve to make decisions about who gets what, how much money we’ll print. With no transparency. If getting us into $6 trillion more debt doesn’t matter, then why are we not getting $350 trillion more in debt so that we can give a check of $1 million to every person in the country? This stimulus should go straight to the people rather than being funneled through banks and corporations like this bill is doing. 2 trillion divided by 150 million workers is about $13,333.00 per person. That’s much more than the $1,200 per person check authorized by this bill."

Oh, look-- two mega-rich worthless Wall Street suck-ups agree with each other that Massie is a bad, bad boy:

Massie amigo and fellow Libertarian, Justin Amash, who fled the Trump version of the GOP and became the House's only Independent, defended him in a twitter battle with Trump-worshipping Texas Republican Dan Crenshaw. Amash tweeted "Crenshaw has learned a lot from Donald Trump during his time in Congress. He mischaracterizes a $500 billion corporate welfare fund that will mostly benefit a few large corporations hand-picked by government. Then, when called on it, he changes the topic and calls others liars."

The Washington Post, as always, spoke for the ruling class Establishment: Mike DeBonis with a quintessential Postism: "The scores of lawmakers who rushed back to Washington Friday to secure passage of a $2.2 trillion rescue bill expressed shock and dismay at having to defy the advice of experts and risk their health amid a global pandemic that has already killed more than 1,000 Americans. But many were not surprised at which of their colleagues forced them to do it. During his seven years in Congress, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) has established a reputation as a uniquely irascible congressional gadfly-- one who is frequently at odds with his own party’s leadership, rarely votes for major bills negotiated with Democrats, and, to make an ideological point, is willing to use the House rule book to inconvenience his colleagues. Now, with the coronavirus pandemic threatening the nation, many believe Massie has gone well beyond inconvenience into threatening the health-- and potentially the lives-- of lawmakers and staff. And while Massie’s GOP colleagues have long grumbled about his tactics, he has now attracted the scorn of the most powerful Republican: President Trump. Massie opposes the rescue bill on fiscal and constitutional grounds and threatened ahead of a planned voice vote Friday to require a quorum be present-- 216 members, half the House. Trump called him a 'third-rate Grandstander' on Twitter Friday. 'He just wants the publicity. He can’t stop it, only delay,' he said, calling on voters to 'throw Massie out of Republican Party!'"

Suicide Is Painless

There's disagreement on the left as well. Matt Stoller, writing for The Guardian this past Sunday, said it most clearly-- and most disturbingly: America will be unrecognizable after this pandemic if big corporations walk away with trillions of dollars and no strings attached.

Now, I’m not opposed to supporting industries. This is a crisis, and we do not want a lot of the productive capacity of the United States to fall apart because of a pandemic. But the key to supporting enterprises is to make sure that there are strict conditions, so that power doesn’t consolidate into the hands of monopolists and financiers cherry-picking distressed assets. Otherwise, America will simply be unrecognizable after this pandemic. CNBC personality Jim Cramer, for instance, is worried that after this pandemic America will have just three retailers. And he’s right to be worried about that.

Here’s how we can stop it. There are enough members of Congress to act and prevent what really looks less like a relief package and more a corporate coup. However, the problem is that this group is split into different political parties, and Congressional leadership is taking advantage of that dynamic to jam this through. US Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell wants big business to rule, so he’s playing a trick. He is refusing aid to workers. Democrats are negotiating with him to try to get unemployment assistance and social welfare. McConnell knows Democrats won’t pay attention to corporate bailouts if he takes the public hostage, and Democrats know that they can hand out favors to big business if they just talk about how they got larger checks for workers.

Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chair Pramila Jayapal, in the lead-up to the vote, said she's able to overcome her instincts about the very things Stoller is most worried about. Her own state, Washington "is reeling from the spread of COVID-19, and I have worked tirelessly to ensure the federal government steps up and responds to this crisis."

This bill is an important step forward. It significantly expands unemployment insurance benefits for laid-off and furloughed workers, puts money directly into the pockets of struggling working people and families, provides critical relief in the form of emergency grants and forgivable loans to devastated small businesses and nonprofits, infuses cash into strained local and state governments and health care systems, increases the amounts of personal protective equipment in the Strategic National Stockpile, and supports struggling industries that do right by their employees.

It is not perfect and there is far more Congress must do to do to fully meet our obligation to our constituents. We need to get more money to our health care system, states and localities, guarantee testing and treatment for everyone, expand benefits to those that have been left out and protect the health and safety of people in the criminal justice and immigration detention systems. Congress must also conduct vigorous oversight of industry assistance to ensure taxpayer dollars are used to support workers, not to further inequality.

We are already at work immediately on the next package to ensure it includes provisions we fought for but did not get this time. This is a crisis of epic proportions and we must continue to do everything we can to respond with the scale sufficient to meet the suffering of people across our country. I am proud to represent a district and a state with so much compassion and commitment, and I will continue to fight for all my constituents as we weather this together.

AOC, in the other hand, feels that the House could work a little harder before being stampeded into a bill so foul.





I don't know what to make of these three pictures from a #1 best selling book, The Eyes of Darkness written by Dean Koontz four decades ago and published in 1981. Amazing coincidence... right? CNN has already debunked it as a conspiracy theory. So has Snopes, based on the purported origin of the disease. OK.

Conservatives Don't Want To Pay To Help Victims Of Climate Disasters-- And Don't Want The Government To Work Towards Ameliorating Climate Change

GOP crackpots Tom Massie (KY) and Chip Roy (TX)

Last Thursday, Trump allowed Senate Republicans to vote for a $19.1 billion disaster relief bill. All the Democrats and all but 8 Republicans-- Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Mike Braun (R-IN), Mike Crapo (R-ID), Mike Lee (R-UT), Martha McSally (R-AZ), Rand Paul (R-KY), Jim Risch (R-ID) and Mitt Romney (R-UT)-- voted AYE. They rushed it over to the House where Hoyer asked for routine unanimous approval. One far right freak decided to screw things up for all the people in desperate need of those resources, freshmen asshat Chip Roy, who represents an Austin/San Antonio gerrymandered district that is lookin' a little swingy. Roy-- former Ted Cruz chief of staff-- beat one of the 2 or 3 worst DCCC recruits last cycle, right-of-center Blue Dog Joseph Kopser 177,654 (50.2%) to 168,421 (47.6%). This cycle he's likely to be beaten by progressive all-star Wendy Davis.

Democrats are eager to get the aid flowing to people hurt by natural disasters, ironically mostly in red states + Puerto Rico. With most members out for the week, the only way to do it is with unanimous consent and when Hoyer tried again yesterday, another right-wing crackpot, this time Tom Massie (R-KY) refused. Unlike most of his colleagues, Massie doesn't have to be back in his district speaking with voters since he represents a deep-red zombie district north and west of Louisville where most voters just vote straight Republican no matter what. McCain won with 61.5%, Romney with 63.4% and Trump with 65.2%. The PVI is a prohibitive R+18 and Massie was reelected last year 162,946 (62.2%) to 90,536 (34.6%) for Democrat Seth Hall. Massie won all 20 counties-- and not one of them was close. So instead of holding town halls in the suburbs south on Cincinnati or west of Huntington, West Virginia, or in Owenton, Carrollton or Shelbyville, he can make a pest of himself in DC.

Basically all the Democrats and all but a tiny number of Republicans will vote for the bill when they return next week. Hoyer will give it another shot on Thursday, the day before the national flood insurance program, in the bill expires. Roy opposes the bill because there's no money in it to build a wall-- his constituents had better be praying there's no nature catastrophe (other than Roy) in their district because I suspect, the money wouldn't be approved-- and Massie is against it because the bill doesn't cut back on other programs to pay for this one.

Earlier today we looked at how the Bush Regime is cracking down on scientistic research that exposes the inadequacy of the non-response to Climate Change. This ids what the Republican Party has devolved into. As charlatan Franklin Graham declares a national day of prayer for Trump on Sunday, one Trumpist governor, Ron DeSantis (R-FL), whose state is in grave danger of existential flooding, is hiring "a Chief Resilience Officer, someone who will work to 'prepare Florida for the environmental, physical and economic impacts of climate change, especially sea-level rise.'" Trump's policies will hasten the destruction of communities along Florida's coasts but DeSantis' Chief Resilience Officer will try to... prepare them. Time for Republicans to start pulling their heads out of their asses. Even the ex-governor-- and now senator-- Rick Scott a long-time Climate Change denier now says "Climate Change is real and requires real solutions." In fact, the most right-wing and moronic Trumpist from Florida in Congress, the usually brainless Matt Gaetz, who had whole towns in his district wiped out last year, reluctantly admitted that "Climate change isn't something people get to choose to believe or not, it's happening... I can tell the earth is warming based on overwhelming scientific evidence and I don't think it's a coincidence that we've released like 300 years of carbon in the last several decades."

The new positions represent a watershed moment in a state with more to lose than any other. It feels like that moment in the Wizard of Oz, where the movie turns from black-and-white to color. That both offices will be housed in the governor's suite-- and report directly to DeSantis-- sends a serious message.

With the exception of House Speaker José Oliva, Florida's Republican leaders no longer deny the reality of climate change, which every major scientific organization recognizes is real, is exacerbated by human activity and poses an existential threat.

...A sense of optimism is emerging among Florida scientists, environmentalists and government officials who have spent the past eight years frustrated by the Scott administration's head-in-the-sand approach to the rising waters, extreme rainfalls and more-powerful hurricanes on the radar.

But while encouraged, they're also reserving judgment. For while DeSantis pushed the Florida Legislature to find $686 million for Everglades repair, Lake Okeechobee fixes and springs restoration-- all important elements of the climate-change picture-- his muscle was missing behind a bill that would have required state contractors to consider sea-level projections when building in coastal areas.

Unfortunately, most Trump supporters are more likely to get into Franklin Graham's Day of Prayer for Trump than they are to embrace the Green New Deal.

Our Bipartisan Corrupt Congress Is Choking On Lobbyist Bribes

Progressives were sickened to learn that #DebtTrapDebbie Wasserman Schultz had not just invited the lobbyists that Obama had banned back into the inner sanctums of the Democratic Party but that she was even putting some on the platform committee of the National Convention. That's another reason she just has to go. (Please help Tim Canova defeat her by contributing to his campaign here.) Corporate lobbyists are the scourge of honest government and they gravitate to the most corrupt politicians. You can always tell who are the worst and most dishonest members of Congress are by how in cahoots with K Street they are. Most DC insiders will tell you no one ever compared to John Boehner (R-OH) and Steny Hoyer (D-MD) when it came to gross lobbyist corruption. But when it comes to flat out cash contributions, Hillary has taken more from lobbyists than any other member of Congress in history-- and by far.

Since 1990 lobbyists have given nearly a quarter billion dollars in campaign contributions-- $242,409,524. Think of the most notoriously corrupt members of Congress. Invariably they're the ones who always take the most money from the lobbyists and they;'re the ones who scream the most loudly that they would never, never, never trade a vote for the money they gobble up. These dozen corrupt politicians are all known for their chronic bribe-taking and for their coziness with K Street. America would be better off if all of them were in prison for soliciting bribery.

• Hillary Clinton- $3,135,205
• John McCain (R-AZ)- $1,934,713
• Harry Reid (D-NV)- $1,765,601
• Mitch McConnell (R-KY)- $1,395,110
• Chuck Schumer (D-NY)- $1,364,244
• Rob Portman (R-OH)- $1,069,470
• Bob Menendez (D-NJ)- $1,038,690
• Steny Hoyer (D-MD)- $1,037,382
• Orrin Hatch (R-UT)- $1,016,142
• Roy Blunt (R-MO)- $966,813
• Chuck Grassley (R-IA)- $943,689
• Richard Burr (R-NC)- $917,266

Those are career long totals. Interested in knowing who's bathing in corruption today? These are the dozen most corrupt politicians getting the biggest bribes from K Street this cycle-- and, yes, America would be far better off if all of them were rotting in prison cells instead of infecting Congress with their corruption:

• Chuck Schumer (D-NY)- $349,167
• Marco Rubio (R-FL)- $329,746
• Patty Murray (D-WA)- $257,159
• Richard Burr (R-NC)- $244,813
• Rob Portman (R-OH)- $225,897
• Paul Ryan (R-OH)- $222,600
• Roy Blunt (R-MO)- $216,713
• Kevin McCarthy (R-CA)- $212,273
• Michael Bennet (D-CO)- $209,851
• John Thune (R-SD)- $190,156
• Kelly Ayotte (R-NH)- $180,428
• Patrick Murphy (D-FL)- $176,413

Lobbyists are far more helpful to corrupt politicians than can be measured just by the transfer of cash. Hillary's whole stinking campaign is staffed by lobbyists, as her administration will be. Lobbyists throw fund-raisers for candidates and raise many millions from their clients and business associates. Lobbyists may have only bribed McConnell to the tune of $1,395,110 but they've raised tens of millions for him over the years. Same for Hoyer, Schumer, Reid, Portman and the other egregiously corrupt members of Congress. And this week libertarian-leaning Kentucky Republican, Thomas Massie, went on the record with another little trick lobbyists use to worm their way into the good graces of members of Congress-- using their influence with criminal leadership figures like John Boehner. Massie told the Cincinnati Enquirer that criminally-minded lobbyists approached him as soon as he was elected and taught him a lesson he's never forgotten.

Massie, a Republican who represents Northern Kentucky, said he was approached by a lobbyist who told him he could help the congressman raise enough money to get on the Ways and Means Committee. That's a powerful committee which oversees tax policy and is one of the most coveted panels in Congress. Massie declined to name the lobbyist but said he represents the medical device sector.

“He pulled me and my chief of staff into a meeting,” Massie told The Enquirer. “He offered to raise the money that would be required to get me on Ways and Means. This is a lobbyist telling me he can get me on Ways and Means.”

The unstated implication, Massie said, was that if the lobbyist succeeded in helping Massie get a seat on that panel, the congressman would return the favor with legislative goodies.

“It was one of the scummiest meetings I’ve ever been in,” Massie said. “I left just reeling, thinking about the implications for how this place works, when you realize that the lobbyists pick who goes on which committee.”

...Meredith McGehee, policy director at the Campaign Legal Center, which supports campaign finance and ethics reform, said she had never heard an “explicit” proposal like the one Massie described. But it’s hardly surprising, she said, that a lobbyist would offer to help a lawmaker raise money.

She said the “dues” system puts enormous pressure on lawmakers to raise money for the party committees, and they naturally turn to lobbyists for help. Lobbyists have the ability to “organize and direct money” from their clients, she said, and it’s in their interest to help ambitious lawmakers secure positions of power.

“There’s an enormous amount of pressure on the K Street-type lobbyists to deliver, and if you don’t your clients get hurt,” she said. She and others said it’s also common for lawmakers to rely on lobbyists for advice and assistance as they try to move up the congressional ladder.

That was clear during last fall’s race for the gavel of the Ways and Means Committee between Tiberi and Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas. As they were campaigning for the post, both lawmakers quietly wooed a cadre of Washington lobbyists to support their respective candidacies.

Tiberi said he consulted with lobbyists, including one of his own former staffers, to get advice and support.

“It’s not something nefarious,” Tiberi said. They offered “some suggestions on marketing myself” to the steering committee, he said. And they had “relationships that I don’t have” with key lawmakers.

Others said it’s not unusual for lawmakers to ask lobbyists to weigh in with party leaders on their behalf for plum committee posts.

“You just can’t run (for a committee chairmanship) and say ‘I’m a nice guy and I should get this because I’m qualified’,” David Hobson, a former Ohio congressman who is now a lobbyist, said in an interview last fall. Hobson said lobbyists can make or break a committee chairman’s campaign by whispering nice or negative things into the right ears.

...AshLee Strong, a spokeswoman for Ryan, said: "Speaker Ryan gives zero thought to K Street's preferences for committee assignments."

And Hillary has never voted for anything a lobbyist asked her to vote for-- never. Neither have Harry Reid, John McCain, Chuck Grassley nor Chuck Schumer-- nor any of the criminals in congressional leadership positions. Never! I mean... never vote for any of them, no matter how lesser of two evils they try to sell themselves as in their next election. If you do... you're part of it too. Lobbyist-free zone:

There Are No Syrian Moderate Terrorists But 300 Members Of Congress Voted To Give "Them" Billions Of Our Taxpayer Dollars

We live in a political system where Congress shirks it's clear and unambiguous responsibility to declare war. Instead we get military actions of dubious legality and with superficial public support, which often quickly sours. Thursday the House came as close as they do to debating and voting for war. Disguised as H.R. 3979-- "The Protecting Volunteer Firefighters and Emergency Responders Act of 2014"-- the 2015 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) was clearly meant to draw as little public attention as possible. It passed by a big margin, as always, only 87 Democrats and 32 Republicans with the guts too stand up to the outrageous excesses of the Military Industrial Complex. The final vote was 300-119. The Republicans seeded it with a few goodies for Democrats, like a half-assed crack-down against sexual assault, but many of the Members who care most about the issues weren't taken in and voted no anyway. Take Donna Edwards for example, a perfect target for that kind of appeal. But too smart to fall for it. She voted against it. Donna:

“This National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) extends the authority the Administration is using to justify military action in Syria for an additional two years without explicit Congressional approval or debate. I cannot support a foreign policy to train and equip Syrian rebels and fight ISIS over the long-term absent a full debate and vote by Congress-- that is our constitutional responsibility.

“I support provisions in this House-Senate agreement to help combat sexual assault in the military, and to provide a 1.0 percent pay increase and necessary resources for our service members and their families. Nonetheless, I could not vote for this NDAA. After more than a decade of war, it’s time for a debate in Congress to reassure the American people and our military community about the best path forward.”

Across the aisle, one of the most vocal-- and credible-- opponents of the bill was Walter Jones the conservative Republican whose district includes Camp LeJeune and who has dedicated his career to serving the interests of the men and women in the ranks (rather than the contractors and mercenary corporations). His website explains exactly why he bucked the Establishment and voted NO.

Today, Congressman Walter B. Jones (NC-3) voted against the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2015, which cuts military benefits and provides billions of dollars in spending toward President Obama’s unconstitutional expansion of military force in Iraq and Syria.

The NDAA for FY 2015 cuts military benefits by requiring a $3 increase in certain pharmacy co-pays and a 1 percent decrease in the housing allowance for uniformed service members.

In addition to cuts in military benefits, the NDAA for FY 2015 also includes President Obama’s $5 billion request to fund Operation Inherent Resolve in Iraq and Syria.  Of that $5 billion, $3.4 billion will be used for airstrikes against ISIS and $1.6 billion will be used for training Sunni tribes and forces in Iraq. Overall, the NDAA for FY 2015 authorizes $63.7 billion for Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Pakistan and elsewhere.

“I cannot vote for a bill that cuts military benefits while funding wars that Congress never declared,” said Congressman Jones. Congress repeatedly authorizes spending on undeclared wars that put our troops in danger and then has the audacity to cut the benefits of those they are unconstitutionally sending overseas to fight. It’s just not right.”

Justin Amash, one of the only Republicans in either House of Congress worth taking seriously sent out this tweet right after the vote:

Most of the House progressives voted no as well,Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), Keith Ellison (D-MN), Alan Grayson (D-FL), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Mark Pocan (D-WI), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Beto O'Rourke (D-TX), Judy Chu (D-CA), John Lewis (D-GA), Henry Waxman (D-CA), Mike Honda (D-CA), Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Xavier Becerra (D-CA), Jared Polis (D-CO), etc. Most of the Democratic Leadership team voted yes, including Pelosi, Hoyer, Clyburn, Israel/Luján, Wasserman Schultz. And both freshmen who were already sworn in because of unexpired terms-- Alma Adams (D-NC) and NJ machine boss George Norcross' hopeless brother Donald Norcross both planted their flags on the side of the Military Industrial Complex. No one should have expected any more from either.

"Today," wrote Seatte Rep. Jim McDermott to his constituents, "I voted in opposition to H.R. 3979, the National Defense Authorization Act.

"I have said consistently that if President Obama was prepared to escalate military action against ISIS or to expand the arming and training of the ‘moderate’ Syrian opposition, he must come to Congress with a plan and ask for our support.

"And we, as Members of Congress, must take seriously our Constitutional responsibility when it comes to matters of war and peace. There is no question in my mind that ongoing operations against ISIS in Iraq and Syria have become a full-fledged military campaign, which warrants a fresh Congressional debate on an authorization for the use of military force.

"And yet, this afternoon the House passed a gargantuan NDAA with only one hour of debate on the floor, a clear abdication of Congressional authority in deciding the conditions under which we send our men and women into conflict.

"I remember the last time Congress failed to thoroughly debate a plan for military action in the Middle East; it unleashed a Pandora’s Box in Iraq and the wider region that we struggling to contain even today.

"I appreciate the unenviable position the President faces in Iraq and I even sympathize with his reluctance to seek cooperation from a Congress that has done its upmost to stymie his legislative agenda for the past five years. Nevertheless, I will not vote to authorize billions of dollars toward a military campaign, as well as a clear military campaign by proxy, without the proper and robust debate such a grave action deserves."

A senior member of the House Armed Services Committee, California Democrat John Garamendi explains, in some detail, why he voted what what he saw as "an imperfect" bill. First and foremost: pork for his own district-- through Beale and Travis Air Force Bases:

While Congressman Garamendi disagrees with portions of this extensive legislation, it earned his support through the protection of vital missions at Beale and Travis Air Force Bases, improved transitional services for new veterans, and several important measures to reduce wasteful spending in the Pentagon budget.

“Throughout the committee process, I’ve worked to ensure that the NDAA treats our servicemembers and veterans with the respect they deserve. I’ve also done everything I can to preserve the vital Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) and Air Mobility missions at Beale and Travis Air Force Bases, missions that will only grow in importance as we continue to adapt to 21st century threats,” Garamendi said. “If I were the sole author of this bill, there would be some significant modifications to some of the language, but as a good faith compromise bill, it has earned my support.”

The NDAA prohibits the retirement of the U-2 and KC-10 fleets in 2015, protecting important missions at Beale and Travis, respectively.

“Military priorities change with time, and in the 3rd District, we are blessed to have two missions that will only grow with importance as America adapts and responds to modern threats: Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance at Beale and Air Mobility at Travis,” Garamendi said. “As we’re seeing with the rise of organizations like ISIL, extremist organizations are becoming an even bigger threat. We need to know what’s happening on the ground, and when necessary, quickly respond. That’s why it is very important to preserve the U-2 and KC-10 missions until the next generation technologies are ready.”

The NDAA includes a 1% pay raise for the troops and improved mental health screenings to earlier diagnose and treat post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and brain injuries that so often plague servicemembers when they return to civilian life.

The bill also includes several provisions to help veterans succeed in civilian life, including:

  •         Changes to the Transition Assistance Program that make it easier for transitioning service members to understand and use their benefits. In particular, the NDAA requires additional instruction and guidance on pursuing post-secondary education, including financial guidance and detailed instructions on how to use the Veterans’ Benefits Administration’s educational benefits such as the post-9/11 GI Bill;

•         Programs to make it easier for servicemembers to obtain professional credentials (professional accreditation, Federal occupational licenses, state professional licenses, and certifications) through their military training. For example, electrical maintenance training in the military could also be used to fulfill some of the requirements needed to obtain a state electrician license; and

•         A pilot program to establish connections between the Department of Defense and state veterans’ agencies. Under this program, the Department of Defense will supply essential information to state veterans’ agencies to make servicemembers’ transition from military service to civilian life easier. This is similar to the California Department of Veterans Affairs’ Operation Welcome Home.

“Imagine spending years of your life getting certified in a skilled trade, only to be told you need to go through a nearly identical certification process once you hang up your uniform. That’s the reality for thousands of servicemembers transitioning to civilian life,” Garamendi explained. “It’s a waste of taxpayer dollars, since we’re often subsidizing these private certification processes through financial aid programs, and it’s a waste of time and potential earnings and advancement for the new veteran looking to get a jumpstart on a civilian career. While there’s more to be done, I’m glad the NDAA is making progress on this front.”

The NDAA continues our nation’s slow but positive progress in addressing the issue of sexual assaults in the military.  This NDAA:

•         Requires the Secretary of Defense to consider the preference of sexual assault victims regarding whether offenses should be prosecuted by court-martial or in a civilian court;

•         Allows a victim of sexual assault, who believes that their rights were violated during the court martial process, the ability to petition the Court of Criminal Appeals to require the court martial to comply with the Military Rules of Evidence;

•         Provides an appeal process for individuals who were victims of a sex-related offense and were discharged from the military for what they believe is a side-effect of their assault, such as psychological struggles, or a failure to adjust; and

•         Requires the establishment of a Defense Advisory Committee on Investigation, Prosecution, and Defense of Sexual Assault in the Armed Forces.

“I believe that if victims of sexual assault in the military want to pursue their complaints through an independent civilian process, they should be given that opportunity. This NDAA doesn’t go far enough, but we’re getting closer to a system that empowers and fairly treats the victims of sexual assault and deters these horrific crimes from ever occurring,” Garamendi said.

The NDAA rejects a Department of Defense proposal to substantially cut commissaries on military bases, which would have led to a de facto pay cut for servicemembers and military families. It also requires the Secretary of Defense to conduct a review, utilizing the services of an independent organization experienced in retail grocery analysis, of the defense commissary system to help determine the best way forward while still providing significant savings to patrons.

“I’m ever mindful of backdoor pay cuts to servicemembers and their families. Let’s be clear: the proposed commissary cut would have taken money out of the pockets of people defending our nation and the family members who support them at home. I’m sure there are reasonable savings we can find in the commissary program without increasing food prices, and I will review any such proposals as they’re presented to us, but of all the places to cut waste in the NDAA, commissaries are near the bottom of the list,” Garamendi added.

Meet The 123 Members Of Congress Who Want The NSA To Continue Undermining Americans' Right To Privacy

Democratic leaders for domestic spying and for more Iraq war

Last night, the House continued debating 2015 appropriations for the Department of Defense (H.R. 4870). Voting on amendments went just past 11PM and while they were going on, I at was at a lecture-- an amazing lecture-- by Glenn Greenwald. During the lecture, a version of which you can watch at the link in the last sentence, I tweeted something to the effect of Greenwald's presentation being better than a rock show. And it was. As he was wrapping it up, he tried to end on an upbeat and hopeful note, but he warned that if we're looking for real reform, the government and Congress were not the place to look. Some of those amendments voted on last night prove his point, particularly the 3 failed attempts by Barbara Lee (D-CA) to withdraw congressional authorization for war. But another amendment that passed probably would have pleased Gleenwald as much as it pleased me, and it was offered by a libertarian Republican, Thomas Massie of Kentucky.

Even before the House got to Massie and Lee, it passed an amendment the day before proposed by Alan Grayson (D-FL) to prohibit the "use of funds to enter into a contract with any offeror that has been convicted of misconduct such as theft, forgery, bribery, or violating Federal criminal tax laws." The House approved it unanimously!

All three Barbara Lee amendments failed, including the one she offered on behalf of the Congressional Progressive Caucus to require that no funds in the Department of Defense FY2015 Appropriations bill go towards combat operations in Iraq. "We must not let history repeat itself in Iraq," she said, "because the reality is there is no military solution in Iraq. This is a sectarian war with long standing roots that were flamed when we invaded Iraq in 2003. Any lasting solution must be political and take into account respect for the entire Iraqi population." CPC Chairmen Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ) and Keith Ellison (D-MN) backed her up. Raúl: "Too many lives have already been lost in the quagmire that is Iraq. There is no 'part way' when it comes to military involvement-- what starts as a surefire military success in the eyes of politicians ends in prolonged conflict when reality sets in. We all want peace for the region, but it cannot be achieved through more American bloodshed." Keith: "Airstrikes and sending combat troops to Iraq is not the way forward. The current crisis threatens to push Iraq and the region into a wider sectarian war and can only be solved when Iraq’s minorities are given the political representation they deserve. The United States should exercise all the leverage we have with the Iraqi government and regional powers to press President Maliki into a more equitable power-sharing agreement."

The amendment failed 165-250, 44 Democrats joining 206 (all but 23) Republicans to defeat it. Who were these 44 Democrats voting against this amendment? These are the one who give people like Greenwald so little faith in the ability of Congress to effect real reform. Although Pelosi and Becerra voted with the Democrats, other Democratic House leaders-- Steny Hoyer, Jim Clyburn, Steve Israel and Debbie Wasserman Schultz-- paraded a mangey group of mostly Blue Dogs and New Dems across the aisle into the arms of the Republican warmongers.

The success of Massie's amendment limiting NSA domestic spying-- and it was a big success, having passed 293-123-- came as a surprise. It's not exactly the bill Glenn Greenwald would have written but if it ever becomes law-- I can't imagine Dianne Feinstein allowing it to get through the Senate-- it will block intelligence agencies from conducting warrantless and “backdoor” searches of U.S. communications. The amendment prohibits the search of government databases for information on U.S. citizens without a warrant and cuts off funding for the CIA and NSA to build security vulnerabilities, or "backdoors," into domestic tech products or services for surveillance purposes. Massie: "The American people are sick of being spied on." Two of Congress' worst Military-Industrial Complex whores, Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD) and Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), both of whom work assiduously to allow domestic spy agencies to wreck every concept of privacy-- both could be especially nasty apparachiks in a futuristic dystopian Orwell novel-- whined that it shouldn't be allowed to be voted on. Fortunately, most House Members disagreed.

In the end 135, Republicans and 158 Democrats voted to pass it, just 94 Republican and 29 Democrats voting for more domestic spying. Again, Hoyer, Israel and Wasserman Schultz were the Democrats who collect fat checks from the Military Industrial Complex and who led slimy warmongers like Adam Schiff (Blue Dog-CA), John Barrow (Blue Dog-GA), Kyrsten Sinema (Blue Dog-AZ), Patrick Murphy (New Dem-FL), Jim Himes (New Dem-CT), Ron Barber (Blue Dog-AZ), and Scott Peters (New Dem-CA) to make common cause with GOP reactionaries like Buck McKeon, Michele Bachmann, Joe Pitts, Ed Royce, Fred Upton, Majority Leader McCarthy, John Kline, Eric Cantor, and Tom Cotton against the American people.