Remember back when Congress believed in oversight? Think hard - way back in the 1990's or 1980's or 1970's ... I guess it's an idea that's out of fashion in the new millenium (maybe oversight = hating America these days; I can't be sure because the number of things that = hating America seems to grow daily, and I'm not on the listserv that would keep me updated). Anyway, since the Republican Congress has shown a (pathetic) lack of interest in investgiating the misuse of taxpayer money (your money) in conducting the war in Iraq, Sen. Byron Dorgan proposed setting up a Truman Committee-style investigatory panel to look into spending abuses. Needless to say, that proposal was defeated, with Sen. Chafee casting the only vote for it from the GOP side of the aisle. Senator Frist and friends won't hold major oversight hearings, and they don't want anyone else holding them either.
But that's the Republicans in Congress for you - avidly anti-accountability; strongly pro-massive (unregulated) payouts to some of their best campaign contributors. I mean who needs to make sure that our money is being spent effectively? It's not like there's a war on or a big budget deficit at the moment.
UPDATE: Of course just to be clear the White House and Justice Department are engaged in similar (arguably even worse) cover-ups for businesses that are robbing the people blind and failing to provide much needed supplies and services to our troops fighting abroad: "The administration has invoked an obscure part of the False Claims Act to prevent all but one of more than 50 whistleblower suits brought by employees of U.S. contractors in Iraq from moving forward to trial."
Posted by armand at June 21, 2006 03:07 PM | TrackBack | Posted to PoliticsIt may not be just the "Republican Senate".
Posted by: jacflash at June 22, 2006 12:53 PM | PERMALINKWell, ok - I've never really been a member of the Murtha fan club, and if he did illegal things he should be prosecuted for them (though given the level of hyperbole in the opening paragraph, I'd likely want to rely on more than just this source).
But point of this post is that I'm in favor of investigating negligence and war profiteering - and Jack Murtha has no power over whether that occurs. Congress could investigate, as could the Justice Dept. or this proposed "Truman Commision" - but none of them are vigilantly doing that. And that's b/c of inaction or outright opposition to oversight coming from the Republicans who hold all the levers of power in DC - not one 70-something member of the minority party in the House.
Posted by: Armand at June 22, 2006 01:12 PM | PERMALINKMy point was just that this sort of thing isn't a new, or exclusively Republican, problem. Note that the article points to Pelosi and Kanjorski, too.
As for sourcing and editorial tone, it's the Washington Times, which is squishy, but they're citing the LAT and Roll Call, which are presumably less squishy.
Posted by: jacflash at June 22, 2006 01:23 PM | PERMALINKWell it's not so much the squishiness as just the overeagerness to point out every flaw and potential flaw the guy's had since the 4th grade. So he's running for Leader? So what? Santorum and Alexander are running for Senate Whip - I don't think those choices especially relevant to this kind of story.
As to the point - sure, in terms of who's carrying out the abuses, it might very well not just be Republicans. But it terms of who's blocking us from holding the abusers accountable, or even just get a clearer understanding of the scope and depth of the abuses, that is the Republicans.
Posted by: Armand at June 22, 2006 01:49 PM | PERMALINK