Home > Taking the President to Court
By Congressman John Conyers
As some of you may be aware, according to the President and
Congressional Republicans, a bill does not have to pass both
the Senate and the House to become a law. Forget your sixth
grade civics lesson, forget the book they give you when you
visit Congress - "How Our Laws Are Made," and forget
Schoolhouse Rock. These are checks and balances, Republican-
style.
As the Washington Post reported last month, as the Republican
budget bill struggled to make its way through Congress at the
end of last year and beginning of this year (the bill cuts
critical programs such as student loans and Medicaid
funding), the House and Senate passed different versions of
it. House Republicans did not want to make Republicans in
marginal districts vote on the bill again, so they simply
certified that the Senate bill was the same as the House bill
and sent it to the President. The President, despite
warnings that the bill did not represent the consensus of the
House and Senate, simply shrugged and signed the bill anyway.
Now, the Administration is implementing it as though it was
the law of the land.
* Congressman John Conyers’s diary :: :: *
Several public interest groups have sought to stop some parts
of the bill from being implemented, under the theory that the
bill is unconstitutional. However, getting into the weeds a
bit, they have lacked the ability to stop the entire bill.
To seek this recourse, the person bringing the suit must have
what is called "standing," that is they must show they were
injured or deprived of some right. Because the budget bill
covers so many areas of the law, it is difficult for one
person to show they were harmed by the entire bill. Thus,
many of these groups have only sought to stop part of it.
After consulting with some of the foremost constitutional
experts in the nation, I determined that one group of people
are injured by the entire bill: Members of the House. We
were deprived of our right to vote on a bill that is now
being treated as the law of the land.
So, I am going to court. With many of my Democratic
Colleagues (list appended at the bottom of this diary), I
plan to file suit tomorrow in federal district court in
Detroit against the President, members of the Cabinet and
other federal officers seeking to have a simple truth
confirmed: a bill not passed by the House and Senate is not a
law, even if the President signs it. As such, the Budget
bill cannot be treated as the law of the land.
As many of you know, I have become increasingly alarmed at
the erosion of our constitutional form of government.
Whether through the Patriot Act, the President’s Secret
Domestic Spying program, or election irregularities and
disenfranchisement, our fundamental freedoms are being taken
away. Nothing to me is more stark than this, however. If a
President does not need one House of Congress to pass a law,
what’s next?
The following is a list of co-plaintiffs on this lawsuit. I
would note that I did not invite every Member of the House to
join in the suit, and I am certain many, many more Members
would have joined if asked. However, this was not possible
for various arcane legal reasons.
The other plaintiffs include Rep. John Dingell, Ranking
Member on the Energy and Commerce Committee; Rep. Charles B.
Rangel, Ranking Member on the Ways and Means Committee; Rep.
George Miller, Ranking Member on the Education and Workforce
Committee; Rep. James L. Oberstar, Ranking Member on the
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee; Rep. Barney
Frank, Ranking Member on the Financial Services Committee;
Rep. Collin C. Peterson, Ranking Member on the Agriculture
Committee; Rep. Bennie Thompson, Ranking Member on the
Homeland Security Committee; Rep. Louise M. Slaughter,
Ranking Member on the Rules Committee; Rep. Fortney "Pete"
Stark, Ranking Member on the Ways and Means Health
Subcommittee; Rep. Sherrod Brown, Representing Ohio’s 13th
District.
Forum posts
1 May 2006, 02:34
Conyer’s is a phony. His vote for the "Iran Freedom Support Act" tells us all we need to know.
The reason he is pursuing this is because it will go nowhere. He was the one leading the effort on election fraud, the downing street memo, the impeachment of Bush on illegal wiretapping...all of which went nowhere. He pretends to lead the charge on important issues and then stalls and tells everyone there is nothing he can do.
(Actually he never did do anything about illegal wiretapping even though he pretended he was doing so)
This is all a distraction to pretend that he is doing something.
1 May 2006, 02:53
As long as Americas and Britains finance industry can keep its strength their capitalist modell will prevail. They only danger comes from overextending the capability of the markets.
F. e. U.S. allows the cheap imports from China, in order to keep inflation down - the costs are only high for not so well educated workers or the working poor. As this crowd is growing it can cause also social unrest.
On the other hand China keeps all the earned Dollars in U.S. treasuries and so does Japan. If those economies in Asia suffer a setback we see another crisis.
The E.U. must create their own markets, because of the social modell the prefer! Also to gain strength, in order to compete for engergy and raw materials.
In the next 10 years the dollar will loose defenitely its lead. Iran and Russia move already out of the Dollar. The 5 Gulfstates plus Saudi Arabia are going to create their own Petro-Currency. Energiecompanies like Exxon and Shell know already about the danger and try to buy as much engergy resource as they can, but the loose on the political side as more countries nationalize their energy resources or keep it like Russia inside one company.
2 May 2006, 03:42
Dear John Conyers,
This article is seriously encouraging that there is movement in the right direction. However, what has been lacking up until now is clarification of who in Congress, the House, our Military and other Federal areas, are supportive of our Constitution. With all the ongoing Indictments resulting from sandals and strange, weird and very suspicious and questionable behaviors of our Government, it’s time to determine who is on what side. The problem being addressed by John Conyers action is vital and the time has come to move forward.
I say this with knowledge having been in a family for more than 26 years who joined Organized Crime. Only this wasn’t any ordinary Crime System and happens to be part of what we are witnessing in the news that involves our Federal Government. My personal commitment for years has been to fight this, but up until now, I’ve been challenged by who to connect with at the Federal Level. Like many of you, I’m a US citizen and if you know something is seriously wrong, it’s your duty to connect with someone to make it known. That way it can be reviewed and possibly changed! But the problem is multifaceted by not only being just a local problem or a State problem, it’s also a Federal problem! Up until reading this, I’ve wondered who can be trusted? Now I know.
Those in the Federal system, in the House and in Congress who know what needs to be done to protect our Constitution, need to make it happen now! Those who object are demonstrating by their behavior where they stand. Already, this has been happening, so it’s important to note who they are! Many of you accept the thought that far worse crimes other than corruption have been committed, these crimes haven’t yet surfaced. They exist and for me, it’s still too emotional to write in a simple way of what they are. I’m also not the only one who knows about this as there are others who can explain them to you. However, when they surface, those who have demonstrated that they side with the criminal element will “WEAR It WELL!”
I anticipate that more news will surface each week to explain this. I encourage all of you to get involved with reading the news (especially alternative news sources), participate in Blogs and actively post. For me, it’s been the quickest way to learn. For those of you who don’t yet feel comfortable with taking a stand, as more news surfaces, you’ll eventually know where your heart should be. I know it’s a personal choice and we all have to do what we should do, when it’s important to us. I also know that when more news surfaces to explain this, you’ll realize how important it is to speak out against this too.
John Conyers, I have intimate experience with this criminal system, please accept that I stand with you!
Marty Didier
Northbrook, IL
PS) Over time, I’ve been confronted with a great deal of “disinformation” purposely placed to confuse and redirect everyone’s attention. My comment to this is, don’t let it bother you as eventually it will become a thing of the past.