Poor Leadership -- Don't pass into law what you know is wrong...

[acroyear]

Slashdot comment on the PATRIOT crapola

When the PATRIOT act was signed into law, I didn't like a lot of it, but I was one of the people saying "don't get your panties in a wad. Congress and the President are doing their best at legally stepping up enforcement, and due to the urgency they're doing so by re-treading RICO laws. Anything which turns out to be unconstitutional will get struck down by the courts, and life will go on."

Sure enough, some of those provisions of the new law are being tested against our constitutional rights via the court system. This is how our system of government is supposed to work. Bravo for American government!

My reply:

On the other hand, there's enough legal education and know-how in the system right now (most Senators and a sizeable # of Congressmen are either lawyers or have been in service for a number of years, and certainly ALL of them have a lawyer on their staff, especially in the committees, to help draft the legislation) to have been able to make the decision that its unconstitutional and not even bothered to vote for or sign it in the first place.

Passing something with so many bluntly unconstitutional clauses, just to say "we're doing *something* (even if for now its the wrong thing)" is just plain poor leadership.

Comments

[thatliardiego.livejournal.com]

The thing was so thick and loaded with crapola, and the circumstances on Capitol Hill at the time (lawmakers gathering to sing "God Bless America" on the steps) led to the fact that it was rammed through, and very few members of Congress actually read the thing at the time.

And who wanted to, in fall of 2001, be called "soft on terrorism."

Russ Feingold had more balls than any man in the Senate the day that thing passed.

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

Another person's reply to my slashdot comment: "I think that on the third hand, there's enough legal education and know-how in the system right now to know that any legal recourse against such an unconstitutional law will take about 3-4 years. About the length of most governmental appointments... *hrmmm*"

To which I add that voters don't normally vote against someone because something the elected voted in favor of turned out to be unconstitutional. If it was the case, then FDR wouldn't have won in '40, after the TVA and half the other new deal pieces were struck down. The trouble with this taking place now, is it'll be long forgotten by the time the election rolls around. The Courts, especially the Supreme Court, aught to do its work in September, so that it can be used in October as cannon fodder for the incumbent jackass who passed the damned thing.