Amidst Election Plugging in the Media, Here's One They Missed...

Thanks to Just Generic for suggesting this item. This story should have been publicized more.

There are a lot of critical issues that we have to be aware of when we go to the voting box on Tuesday. However, there are such stories (which received little, if no publicization in the press. Go figure.) that have to hover in our minds as we make our choices of what and whom will represent us in government, local and national. Out of the limelight, a bill, H.R. 5122 became law in late Octobter. It is called the " John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007".

After wading through all the appropriations and protocols to revamp and reactualize the military, there is a little nugget which indicates a transfer of power when there is public disorder of the domestic sort. The bill plainly states this and it is appalling that few ever thought to point this out in their questions to President Bush during the usual Washington Press core:

``(A) restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that--
``(i) domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order; and

``(ii) such violence results in a condition described in paragraph (2); or

``(B) suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such insurrection, violation, combination, or conspiracy results in a condition described in paragraph (2).

``(2) A condition described in this paragraph is a condition that--

``(A) so hinders the execution of the laws of a State or possession, as applicable, and of the United States within that State or possession, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State or possession are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or

``(B) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.

``(3) In any situation covered by paragraph (1)(B), the State shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.

``(b) Notice to Congress.--The President shall notify Congress of the determination to exercise the authority in subsection (a)(1)(A) as soon as practicable after the determination and every 14 days thereafter during the duration of the exercise of that authority.''.

What does it mean? In a domestic national emergency, the President has total authority. What is scary about this section in a bill about military issues is the fact that these amendments almost give absolute power to the Executive Branch without needing to go through "checks and balances". After all, one has to question why the Founding Fathers went through all the trouble setting up such a system if two-hundred and a half years later one national leader would do the best of his ability to erase what they created? The other side of the coin is the fact that this states that the American people have absolutely no say over their fate in such a crisis. It does not even question what might happen if the President is not of good health, mentally or physically? It does not determine what type of national disaster would afford this authority. Chillingly enough, it doesn't even ensure the protection of civil liberties at such a time.

Pack your bags and put together your survival packs. When the day of disaster comes, you might not even have a say about where you will be sent in the matter of a crisis. God help you if your city is quarantined for any such reason. Your cries will go unnoticed. Haven't you heard of the epidemic troubles that might befall a society if the bird flu mutates into a more dangerous strain?

It is enough to let the hairs stand up on the back of your neck.

However, there are people who are speaking up about this development from Congress.

On the blog, "Another Day in the Empire," there is a very telling report of what the bill might do and what people have spoken about it. Here it is in black and white. It is very telling of what might happen when such an event might arise and the pressures it might ensue:

On October 17, with little fanfare, the unitary decider signed H.R.5122, or the John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007. “The act provides $462.8 billion in budget authority for the department. Senate and House conferees added the $70 billion defense supplemental budget request to the act, so overall, the act authorizes $532.8 billion for fiscal 2007,” explains Jim Garamone of the American Forces Press Service.

According to a press release from the office of Senator Patrick Leahy, however, the bill takes a “sizable step toward weakening states’ authority over their [National] Guard units, according to the congressional leaders who are leading the fight for Guard empowerment.” Leahey and senator Kit Bond, a Montana Republican, “said the conference agreement is expected to include a provision making it easier for the President to declare martial law, stripping state governors of part of their authority over state National Guard units in domestic emergencies. The provision is opposed by the National Governors Association and by key leaders in both the House and Senate.”

Frank Morales, an Episcopal priest and activist in New York City, writes that the John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007 actually encourages the establishment of martial law “by revising the Insurrection Act, a set of laws that limits the President’s ability to deploy troops within the United States. The Insurrection Act (10 U.S.C.331 -335) has historically, along with the Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C.1385), helped to enforce strict prohibitions on military involvement in domestic law enforcement. With one cloaked swipe of his pen, Bush is seeking to undo those prohibitions.”

In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, Bush demanded Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco yield to him the command over any National Guard troops sent to the area. “Bush wanted to invoke the Insurrection Act, which would have allowed him to take control over all armed forces deployed, including Louisiana’s National Guard troops. But under the terms of the act, he had to get the assent of the legislature or the governor of the state. The legislature was not in session and Blanco refused,” writes Deirdre Griswold. As of September 11, 2005, Griswold notes, citing the Los Angeles Times, “Bush has not yet invoked the Insurrection Act, but his administration is still discussing how to make it easier for the federal government to override local authorities in the future.”

One could only shake one's head at this. It's not enough to read the tremendous amount of money and attention paid to the military. The money could be spent on creating jobs or education. However, reading this should be the real Halloween scare on the level of The Exorcist (1973). This is especially appropo because it was passed just days before the holiday.

The only thing to do is to vote your conscience and wisdom at the ballot box, electing public servants who will think of the people, and not to dismantle the system of Checks and Balances simply because it might fit a certain agenda.

Especially not this one.