Foley's Folly

Well, I've been quite busy and neglected to blog after the recess. I will atone for that partially now with an Awfulaw exclusive. Nothing here is new or unpublished. I have simply researched and put in context, two pieces of content that illustrate nicely the hypocrisy of Mark Foley, the house representative who is at the center of a scandal that might have far-reaching implications for the 2006 mid-term elections. I only searched the 109th Congress.

7/10/2006 -- Mark Foley introduces H.R. 5749 To amend title 18, United States Code, to protect youth from exploitation by adults using the Internet, and for other purposes.

3/8/2006 -- Mark Foley introduces H.R. 4905 To provide for the registration of sex offenders and for appropriate notification of their whereabouts, and for other purposes.

6/30/2005 -- Mark Foley introduces H.R. 3133 To provide for the registration of sex offenders and for appropriate notification of their whereabouts, and for other purposes.

5/18/2005 -- Mark Foley introduces H.R. 2423 To improve the national program to register and monitor individuals who commit crimes against children or sex offenses.

3/8/2005 -- Mark Foley introduces H.R. 1142 To protect children from exploitive child modeling, and for other purposes.

2003 -- Mark Foley, using screen name Maf54 types the following messages to a teenage Congressional Page: (typos left as-is; excerpts only)

did any girl give you a haand job this weekend
good so your getting horny
did you spank it this weekend yourself
cute butt bouncing in the air [after asking about details of how the teen masturbates]
i always use lotion and the hand
well I have aa totally stiff wood now
is your little guy limp...or growing
so you got a stiff one now
um so a big bulge
love to slip them off of you
and gram the one eyed snake
get a ruler and measure it for me

sources:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery
http://abcnews.go.com/images/WNT/02-02-03b.pdf

Congress in Recess

Congress is in recess until September 5th. I will resume blogging at that time.

The Best Day Yet

Yesterday was the best day in Congress since I started this blog. They took no action whatsoever. They are in recess.

Another Government Money Pit

H.R.5832 : To establish the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, to provide funding for the support of fundamental agricultural research of the highest quality, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Gutknecht, Gil [MN-1] (introduced 7/19/2006)
Cosponsors: (4)
Committees: House Agriculture
Latest Major Action: 8/7/2006 House committee/subcommittee actions.
Status: Executive Comment Requested from USDA.

I am surprised this bill is not sponsored by Richard Pombo, nor is he a co-sponsor. The Republican Representative from Tracy, California bragged on May 11, 2006 about acquiring grant money for farmers to help keep our grape, cherry, walnut, and all fruit and vegetable farmers competitive globally. The grant is called the "Specialty Crops Block Grant" program. Maybe he was busy visiting our national parks in his government-subsidized RV rental with his family and couldn't be bothered.

Maybe the problem with this bill is, it doesn't give the money directly to agricultural businesses (corporate welfare) but instead, presumes to take over a part of their business... the R&D side. Maybe he realizes that the best people to conduct research into agriculture are, well, the people who stand to profit if the research is conducted in the best possible way. Maybe he realizes just how inefficient the government is at conducting lofty-sounding research. I doubt it.

Bills like this list findings that are supposed to support the reasoning behind getting the government involved in whatever the bill proposes. Here are the bullet points that supposedly create the need for a new government agency...

(A) agriculture in the United States faces critical challenges, including
impending crises in the food, agricultural, and natural resource systems of the
United States;
(B) exotic diseases and pests threaten crops and livestock;
(C) obesity has reached epidemic proportions;
(D) agriculturally related
environmental degradation is a serious problem for the United States and other
parts of the world;
(E) certain animal diseases threaten human health; and
(F) agricultural producers of several primary crops in the United States are
no longer the world's lowest-cost producers.

I challenge anyone to tell me why any of these findings a) are problems or goals best handled by the government or b) are not already the responsibility of another agency.

Specifically, the disease portions of these findings (B, C (arguable) and E) could be handled by the Centers on Disease Control (CDC.) It also seems to me that we have a huge agency called the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that is supposed to handle environmental concerns ("Environmental" is right in their name) which would presumably be responsible for item D.

That leaves A and F. Item A is incredibly general and item F is a problem for the business owners to work on. It should be added that the "lowest-cost" declaration is not substantiated with any numbers. It doesn't say if it takes subsidies into consideration or any other factor that might skew the results outside of what one would call free trade.

Oh, and did I mention there were only four items of activity on the Thomas website from yesterday's session. It is pretty sad when I can pick out an awfulaw winner from only four possible items. Sadder still is the fact that there was another one in the running.

Like Mel Gibson Urging People to Support Israel

H.R.5646 : To study and promote the use of energy efficient computer servers in the United States.
Sponsor: Rep Rogers, Mike (MI) [MI-8] (introduced 6/20/2006)
Cosponsors (None)
Committees: House Energy and Commerce; Senate Energy and Natural Resources House Reports: 109-538
Latest Major Action: 8/4/2006 Referred to Senate committee.
Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

In a nutshell, any company who needs Congress to tell them to buy energy efficient servers a) isn't going to find out about Congress' urging anyway b) probably deserves to go out of business.

For the longer version, cNet.com had this article which says very well what I would have said anyway.

Gotta Keep 'Em Separated

H.R.2389 : To amend title 28, United States Code, with respect to the jurisdiction of Federal courts over certain cases and controversies involving the Pledge of Allegiance.
Sponsor: Rep Akin, W. Todd [MO-2] (introduced 5/17/2005)
Cosponsors: (197)
Committees: House Judiciary; Senate Judiciary
Latest Major Action: 8/4/2006 Referred to Senate committee.
Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Excerpt from text: Except as provided in subsection (b), no court created by Act of Congress shall have any jurisdiction, and the Supreme Court shall have no appellate jurisdiction, to hear or decide any question pertaining to the interpretation of, or the validity under the Constitution of, the Pledge of Allegiance, as defined in section 4 of title 4, or its recitation.

Anybody paying attention to current affairs knows what this is about. Congress, or more accurately, their vocal religious constituents, are nervous about Michael Newdow and his Pledge of Allegiance case. This legislation, if passed, would prevent the Pledge from changing based on unconstitutionality.

Hello -- Does ANYBODY remember basic eighth grade civics? The Supreme Court is supposed to determine constitutionality. That is their job. The legislative branch makes the laws, and to keep them in check, the courts can rule they are unconstitutional. This is called checks and balances and it works because of something called the separation of powers.

Maybe reporters should get together and whenever a member of Congress gives a press conference, a designated reporter (picked at random) should ask a question about the Constitution. I have a feeling Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert would get a lot of good footage from questions like, "What are the five things guaranteed by the first amendment?" or "Which article of the Constitution gives Congress the right to regulate interstate commerce?" I have a feeling it would play out much like Rep. Westmoreland, who was asked to name the ten commandments he wanted displayed in Congress. "Ummmm. Don't murder. Don't lie. Don't steal. Ummmmm. I can't name them all."

Sour Grapes

H.CON.RES.399 : Recognizing the 30th Anniversary of the victory of United States winemakers at the 1976 Paris Wine Tasting.
Sponsor: Rep Thompson, Mike [CA-1] (introduced 5/3/2006)
Cosponsors: (150)
Committees: House Government Reform; Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry
Latest Major Action: 8/2/2006 Passed/agreed to in Senate.
Status: Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.

Did I mention I hate Congressional resolutions. It's bad enough when Congress takes time and money to officially congratulate the Miami Heat for winning THIS year's NBA Championship. Now they take time to call attention to a victory thirty years old?

I hate it even more when the sponsor is MY Congressman. You'll excuse me now while I fire of an email to Rep. Thompson.

Just a note to let you know I don't disagree with Thompson on everything. He did vote for the Hinchey-Rohrabacher Medical Marijuana Amendment which would prohibit federal expense for law enforcement regarding, and prosecution of, medicinal marijuana cases.