Posted on 11/19/2002 3:37:30 PM PST by SunStar
Nov 19, 2002
Barkley would not commit to voting with Republicans on a homeland security bill until the Bush administration committed to a Minnesota welfare waiver - though the independent senator had planned to vote with the GOP all along.
Barkley, an independent, said he received four calls from the White House over the past couple of weeks seeking his support on the bill. Two hours before Tuesday's vote, Barkley said, he got a commitment from Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson to grant the state a continuation of its welfare waiver next year.
Thompson spokesman Tony Jewell confirmed that commitment but said the decision had nothing to do Barkley's vote on homeland security.
Barkley, who is filling out the term of the late Sen. Paul Wellstone, D-Minn., said he already had decided to support the bill.
"But I wasn't going to show that card until I actually see if I could get the commitment from the White House and Tommy Thompson," he said.
Minnesota's waiver, which expired Sept. 30, allowed the state to offer welfare recipients options such as extra schooling and mental-health counseling.
The key vote Tuesday was 52-47 against a Democratic amendment to strip GOP provisions that Democrats considered special interest gifts to corporations. Had that amendment passed, there might not have been time to pass the overall bill this year.
Barkley said he agreed the GOP provisions should be removed but not at the cost of killing the bill.
"I had to make the call whether or not having a homeland security bill was worth those special interest provisions - which I hate," he said. "But I'm a realist to know that that's how this game is played around here."
Barkley has said since arriving here that his No. 1 priority was creation of a new Homeland Security Department.
One provision particularly tough for Barkley to accept was the weakening of a Wellstone amendment barring companies with offshore tax havens from getting federal homeland security contracts.
Barkley said Sen. John McCain, an Arizona Republican who voted with Democrats, told him, "'You're in Wellstone's seat, you should be cognizant of that, and they weakened the Wellstone part, and you ought to say that you're not going to do that.'"
McCain spokesman Marshall Wittmann said the Arizona senator "did not tell him how to vote."
You'd have to be kidding if you think he'd really switch. His blood is old line New England Republican Blue. To people like this, the Democrats are the party for the Irish and Jews and Communists.
Chaffee rated a 44 from the ACU for the past two years. That's about the same as Louisiana's John Breaux, who Freepers seem to be periodically hot and heavy for getting him to switch. If Breaux and Miller switched, everyone here would be calling the RINO's if the continued to vote as they do.
Chaffee, John Breaux, Zell Miller, Olympia Snowe, Arlen "Scottish Law" Specter, Ernest Hollings, Susan Collins, and Ben Nelson form the "mushy middle" of the Senate - ACU ratings between 35 and 65. The rest of the Republicans are more conservative. The rest of the Democrats and Benedict Jeffords are more Liberal. Even McCain hasn't made it down into the "Mushy Middle" yet, though he is trying.
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCommentary.asp?Page=%5CCommentary%5Carchive%5C200211%5CCOM20021114b.html
By Tom DeWeese CNSNews.com Commentary November 14, 2002
Let the political pundits proclaim a new era of post-Reagan conservatism based on the victory of the Republican Party that now controls both Congress and the White House. It is an illusion and a dangerous one.
The election was a voter revolt against further onerous taxation and a response to the threat of the global Islamic holy war. It was neither about conservative values nor a conservative political agenda.
Anyone who looks at the legislative agenda of the Bush administration is forced to conclude that Americans are being stripped of their most valued Constitutional protections. Moreover, the administration has embraced Ted Kennedy's ultra-liberal education and open borders agenda. It continues to further the objectives of the radical environmental agenda called "Sustainable Development."
This is not conservatism. It neither advances, nor protects the freedoms granted by our Constitution. It does just the opposite.
First, let us examine the administration's response to the most immediate threat to America, the global Islamic holy war. The so-called Homeland Security bill is one of the most dangerous pieces of legislation ever put forth by any administration. As Phyllis Schlafly correctly states, "If passed, it will mean a giant increase in Big Government without any effect on the front lines of our security, the FBI and CIA, and little effect on the INS and the visa-issuing section of the State Department."
This single act of government agency reorganization will take away sole control of immigration numbers from Congress and permit the President to set those numbers in concert with other nations and international bodies, i.e. the United Nations.
At a time when thousands of Mexicans and others from South America are streaming across our 2,000-plus mile southern border every single day, the Homeland Security Bill would permit the President to legitimize this wholesale invasion. The Bush administration is on record advocating another amnesty for illegal aliens at a time when there is an estimated eight to eleven million of these lawbreakers loose in the nation. How many of them are from Middle Eastern nations and harbor bad intentions?
If the first year following 9-11-01 is any example, we have all witnessed the government's inability, unwillingness and astonishing disregard for any real security measures. Thousands of visas have been issued to people coming from the very nations sponsoring the Islamic Jihad.
Our borders are no more secure than they were the day the World Trade Center and Pentagon were attacked, and the federalization of airport screeners actually lowered the standards by which these people were hired.
The "profiling" of airline travelers continues to be forbidden, but the Transportation Security Administration has already spent millions to develop a secret system to profile all Americans. It is called CAPPS II, the Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening system, and its purpose is to create an automated system to integrate and analyze both government and private sector databases for the alleged purpose of determining "a threat risk assessment on every airline passenger." Did you get a speeding ticket? Did you purchase a gun? Having a credit problem? Should your name be in any of the countless databases involved, for any reason, you could be refused the right to travel.
Most Americans are unaware that the hurriedly passed USA Patriot Act permits the federal government to ignore the protections of the Fourth Amendment and conduct surveillance without court-issued search warrants. This most fundamental protection no longer exists. Given the liberal philosophy promulgated to generations that have passed through our schools since the 1960s, few are likely to object. Most certainly, the members of Congress who passed the Act did not.
Even the issue of your personal health is no longer yours to determine. Throughout this year, state legislatures were asked by the Bush administration to enact the Model State Emergency Health Powers Act (MSEHPA) that would authorize state officials to forcibly inject anyone with a drug, vaccine, or other treatment. If you refused, health officials would be authorized to remove you and your family from your home and have you quarantined.
MSEHPA would grant authority to seize and destroy your property without compensation. It would permit the rationing of medical supplies, food, and fuel in a declared public health emergency. Most states refused to pass the most egregious elements of MSEHHPA or even vote on the proposed legislation. What is more fundamental to your personal freedom than the right to determine what medical treatment you will accept?
And what is more fundamental to a free society than that its citizens not be required to carry and produce a national ID card on demand? The Homeland Security bill, however, will initiate this hallmark of authoritarian governments. The President's National Strategy for Homeland Security (NSHS) program will convert everyone's driver's license into a national ID card. It does so with the vaguely worded recommendation for the coordination of "suggested minimum standards for state driver's license."
It gets worse. The NSHS also recommends a plan for "military support to civil authorities." The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 was passed to protect Americans against a President-any President-who would use the nation's military to enforce the law against civilians.
As Phyllis Schlafly notes, "It is a terrible mistake to confuse and combine the different missions of the police and the military. The police are trained to respect civil liberties and use the least amount of force, whereas the military are trained to kill the enemy as rapidly as possible."
This was most dramatically demonstrated when US Army tanks participated in the taking of the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, in 1993. Nearly a hundred civilians, women and children included, brought together by common religious beliefs, were gassed and burned to death on the orders of Janet Reno, then-Attorney General for former President Clinton.
Even the most cursory examination of the programs sponsored by the Bush administration reveals a frightening indifference to the Bill of Rights and other elements of the U.S. Constitution. This isn't inadvertence. This is a deliberate series of legislative and administrative choices, all of which diminish the individual freedoms Americans have long taken for granted.
This isn't homeland security. It is homeland insecurity for every American who still thinks that the rule of law will protect him or her against surveillance and the demand that they turn over all aspects of their daily lives to the approval of the government.
(Tom DeWeese is the publisher/editor of The DeWeese Report and president of the American Policy Center, an activist think tank headquartered in Warrenton, Va.)
Copyright 2002, Tom DeWeese
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.