Birds of a Feather
I and the Bird #35 is up at Migrations.
Check out the “charismatic and inspiring avifauna.”
Give Us Some Congressional Accountability
Accountability?
This is not something that our congress critters seem to want. Not accountability, not the transparency provided by public debate of the legislation they choose to enact.
If a given piece of legislation or a specific appropriation is important enough that federal congressional action is appropriate then it seems it should be important enough to be debated and voted upon as a single issue, as a single appropriation.
Congress should eliminate earmarks and eliminate amendments unrelated to a primary bill. Any piece of legislation should address one and only one issue. For example, the recently enacted and signed internet gambling legislation should not have been part of the port security legislation. As Declan McCullagh notes:
If this happened only rarely, perhaps we could forgive our elected representatives for gluing unrelated amendments onto a proposal that’s destined to become law. (With a tight election just weeks away, how many politicians have the mettle to vote against “port security”?)
But the problem is that the technique has become commonplace, meaning that even the sniping sessions that have come to define debate in the U.S. Congress are bypassed. Voters also lose a chance to learn how our supposed public servants vote on specific topics, rather than on a 300-page bill with scores of unrelated components.
Which, of course, is precisely the point. Because politicians dislike being held accountable for their actions–specific votes can be compiled into embarrassing scorecards and inconvenient voting records–they prefer to lump everything together. The U.S. Senate Web site offers an official definition of the practice: a “Christmas tree bill,” meaning unrelated amendments that adorn legislation.
For more examples of Christmas tree bills see the rest of Declan’s post.
If congress is unwilling to hold their debates, to pass legislation in the light of public scrutiny then we must ask who congress represents and whether congress should be allowed to continue to exist as it currently operates.
w the Symptom
Arthur Silber on bush:
And all this is not because of George W. Bush, although he has hastened events. How could it be remotely conceivable that such an utterly ridiculous figure would bring down the most powerful nation in the world, even with the aid of his corrupt cabal? He, and they, could not; he, too, is a symptom of the rot that has been eroding the country’s foundations for at least a century. Do you think so little of the United States that you truly believe the country you imagine still exists could be destroyed by this?
The rest just gets better!
Stay. The. Course.
Crime & Federalism links to a couple videos on bush’s stay the course policies.
It is pretty disheartening to hear the bushites trying to explain how changing tactics on the ground proves that they have never had a ‘stay the course’ strategy. Clearly they never have and do not now know the difference between strategy and tactics. Unfortunately, and with some thanks to the ongoing successes of the American education system, large segments of the population, including lots of talk radio hosts, will drink this kool-aid.
Mark Silva argues that, well, stay the course is still the strategy.
Sweeping Out the Junk
A great view of the throat’s little sweepers, the cilia, and a round, mucous secreting goblet cell:
(Click on image for a larger view.)
Unfortunately, there haven’t been any postings at Artsy Science since May.