Feinstein: Mistress of War Profiteering

Eye on Feinstein's Role in Spending; Monterey County Herald; April 15, 2007

Bloggers and activists are writing a new chapter in the marriage between Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein and husband Richard Blum.

Feinstein has real power. Blum has serious money. For 27 married years, the politician and the investor have excelled professionally while facing periodic queries about Blum's far-flung investments.

The latest round now comes powered by the Internet, fanned by activists on both right and left. The partisans find common cause in questioning Feinstein's role in Pentagon spending while Blum was investing in defense firms.

Critics have accused Feinstein of having a conflict of interest by serving through last year as chairwoman and ranking member of the Senate's military construction appropriations subcommittee at the same time that her husband had financial interests in two firms that rely on defense contracts.

The Senate panel approves some $16 billion annually for military construction projects.

Until 2005, Blum had major holdings in two firms, URS Corp. and Perini Corp., that rely on defense contracts.

Perini received $200 million in federal contracts from 2000 to 2006, primarily with the Army, according to records compiled by the private watchdog group OMB Watch. URS received $1.8 billion worth of contracts -- primarily Air Force, Army and Navy -- during the same period.

Feinstein's spokesman, Scott Gerber, declared that the senator has always 'acted appropriately' and within the Senate's ethics guidelines. He sternly denounced suggestions of conflict, first raised in articles published in the Bay Area's free Metro weekly newspaper, and noted that the Pentagon, not Congress, decides who is awarded contracts.

'The story is filled with inaccuracies, errors and distortions,' Gerber said, 'and it has been pushed by the right-wing bloggers.'

Actually, the story has migrated from left to right and back again.

It was the left's turn again, when female anti-war protesters gathered outside Feinstein's San Francisco home. Code Pink leader Medea Benjamin declared that Feinstein and Blum 'have profited from this war' in Iraq.

On the right, the conservative group Judicial Watch announced its own probe. The Washington-based group, which filed myriad lawsuits against the Clinton administration, is now preparing Freedom of Information Act requests into the URS and Perini contracts.

'We've commenced an investigation,' Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.

Read the rest here.

Comment: I found this interesting because Feinstein is coming under attack by both leftists and conservatives. But its highly unlikely Feinstein will be investigated because one, the MSM is looking the other way; and two, the aristocrat club in the U.S. Senate is a tangled web of mutual profiteering in which few would be willing to cast the first stone. Cleaning this mess up will have to come from the States and repealing the 17^th amendment.

More Information:

• Available on Topix from Centre Daily Times, published Friday Apr 13
• Bloggers, activists raise questions Sen. Dianne Feinstein, husband - Knight Ridder Washington Bureau

Congress Modified the Insurrection Act Through the 2007 Defense Authorization Bill

From Wikipedia:

On September 30, 2006, the Congress modified the Insurrection Act of 1807 as part of the 2007 Defense Authorization Bill. Section 1076 of the new law changes Sec. 333 of the "Insurrection Act," and widens the President's ability to deploy troops within the United States to enforce the laws. Under this act, the President may also deploy troops as a police force during a natural disaster, epidemic, serious public health emergency, terrorist attack, or other condition, when the President determines that the authorities of the state are incapable of maintaining public order. The bill also modified Sec. 334 of the Insurrection Act, giving the President authority to order the dispersal of either insurgents or "those obstructing the enforcement of the laws."

The new law changed the name of the chapter from "Insurrection" to "Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order."

Comment: First, thanks to John MacMullin for providing the heads up on this issue.

This bill is one of those examples that cause a few of us (unfortunately too few) to lose sleep at night. As you can see from the graphic, found also on Wikipedia, the national government through the Office of the President has a substantial increase in power allowing the President to send federal troops into any state without any authorization of Congress.

The Wikipedia posting points out that this change went unmentioned by the President, and I’ll add any member of Congress. Also it mentioned that new power resulted from the ineffectiveness of Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco and the Mayor of New Orleans’ Ray Nagin. While this may be true, I believe that this is in anticipation of a possible pandemic flu epidemic, where whole U.S. cities may be quarantined. Yet to any civil libertarian and state’s right advocate, this should be of great alarm. Can you imagine the federal government coming into your state, declaring marshal law without a formal request from a governor?

Yet this act was signed by 100 percent of the U.S. Senate. Yes, every single Senator signed this bill. In the House, 398 Representatives voted for it as well; amazing. It is truly astounding that these representatives would take power away from their own states and governors and put it the hands of the president.

The truth of the matter is that the Oligarchs are on a steady march to control this country from inside the beltway, and to hell for you and me. However, the only way to stop this is to roll back the power of Congress by repealing the 17^th Amendment, and restoring the balance of power between the States and National Governments.

Wrap-up of the 17th Amendment on the Web for 20 April 2007

I have been a little behind and have wanted to put more time into discussing the various journal articles I have posted, plus posting articles relating to the oligarchy in the U.S. Senate. But it has been more difficult than I imagined. I have been working on another blog that is focused on my state; and my job, work keeps getting in the way.

Anyway, here is the wrap up and some the articles that mention the 17^th Amendment. As the result of Maryland’s decision to move for the repeal of the Electoral College, I more reference. Some folks have recognized the danger that would ensue if the Electoral College was abolished as clearly seen through the consequences of the 17^th and 16^th Amendments.

Thanks,

BD

Comment on Populism post
By common_sense
I would actually like to see the 17th Amendment repealed, so that Senators are selected by the state legislators, giving another level of insulation to a legislative body and strengthing the structure of federalism.
common sense - http://bgcommonsense.blogspot.com/index.html

A Not-so-distant Mirror: the 17th Amendment and Congressional Change
By Brian Duffy
A Not-so-distant Mirror: the 17th Amendment and Congressional Change; Sara Brandes Crook and John R. Hibbing; American Political Science review; Vol 91, No. 4, December 1997. Abstract: At the beginning of the century, the Constitution ...
Repeal the 17th Amendment - http://repealthe17thamendment.blogspot.com/index.html

Whoa, what has happened to States Rights?
By Robb Rail
Since the passage of the 17th Amendment, nobody. We now have two branches of government that are not only concerned with the welfare of the people but dependent on it to stay in office. Is it any surprise that these institutions keep ...
Republicans In Second Life - http://slrepublicans.blogspot.com/index.html

The Failure of Our Republic.
By admin
Also with the removal of State oversight of the Federal government via the 17th amendment there literally is a splinter-government of what once used to be the US Government. As the Federal Senate is now elected rather than appointed as ...
Petty Wars - http://www.pettywars.com

A Dubious Electoral Idea
By mtuggle@carolina.rr.com
Like the passage of the 17th amendment in 1913, direct election will further weaken the influence of the State legislatures oover the national government. Direct election of the president will solidify the control of Washington special ...
Rebellion - http://leagueofthesouth.net/rebellion/index.php/site/index/

Should the 17th Amendment be Repealed?
By NYBamaFan
As such, the core of the problem with federal preemption lies in the passage of the 17th Amendment which abrogated the state legislatures' right to appoint United States Senators in favor of popular election of those officials. ...
TideFans.com - http://www.tidefans.com/forums

NH Inches Closer to Seat Belts
By Free State Project
and so we see more of the uniform federal grid descending, in forms direct and indirect. who needs states at all? ah, 17th amendment, you'll never know what mischief you caused. [ hey, free staters, just joined - thinking of signing the ...
Free State Project - http://community.livejournal.com/freestate/

A look at Haskell’s legacy
Edmond Sun - OK,USA
On the national stage, he supported the election of US senators by popular vote rather than by their state Legislatures, which became the 17th Amendment to ...
See all stories on this topic

Absentee Senators Running for President
By Brian Duffy
Dear Senators: About Those Missed Votes... By: Carrie Budoff ; The Politico; April 9, 2007. Dear John (and Joe and Sam, and Chris, too), This is the Senate. Do we need to reassess our relationship? Yes, you're running for president. ...
Repeal the 17th Amendment - http://repealthe17thamendment.blogspot.com/index.html

How California Lost Its Sovereignty
Signal - Santa Clarita,CA,USA
This loss was in part the fault of the states themselves when they adopted the 17th Amendment to have a direct election of senators by the citizens rather ...
See all stories on this topic

The March Toward Democracy
By Aldacron
This was changed in 1913 with the 17th amendment, but it’sa key point — it’s one of several roadblocks the framers placed in the Constitution to prevent the formation of a democracy. The bicameral legislature, the unelected judiciary, ...
The One With Aldacron - http://aldacron.net/blog

The North American Union Steamroller
By Brian Duffy
The weblog Gates of Vienna has a really interesting posting on the emergence of the North American Union being pushed by the internationalist. The posting is long, however it is very complete and worth a look at. ...
Repeal the 17th Amendment - http://repealthe17thamendment.blogspot.com/index.html

Senate King of Pork Ted Stevens Breaks GOP Record
By Brian Duffy
Sen. Ted Stevens Breaks GOP Record; NewMax.Com; 13 April 2007. Ted Stevens becomes the longest-serving Republican senator in history on Friday. He's been there for more than 38 years, and he isn't finished. ...
Repeal the 17th Amendment - http://repealthe17thamendment.blogspot.com/index.html

THE CONSTITUTION PART X - THE 17TH AMENDMENT
By The Liberal Lie The Conservative Truth
The 17th Amendment - "The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. I have mentioned this Amendment in two previous ...
The Liberal Lie, The Conservative Truth - http://theliberalslies.blogspot.com/index.html

2008 Presidential Contender: Ron Paul
By Terry Mitchell
Paul supports the repeal of the 17th amendment to the US Constitution (he believes US Senators should be selected by state legislatures once again, and not directly elected), opposes campaign finance reforms, advocates better ballot ...
Political CommenTerry - http://commenterry.blogs.com/political_commenterry/

Senate King of Pork Ted Stevens Breaks GOP Record

Sen. Ted Stevens Breaks GOP Record; NewMax.Com; 13 April 2007.

Ted Stevens becomes the longest-serving Republican senator in history on Friday. He's been there for more than 38 years, and he isn't finished. The 83-year-old Alaska Republican was feted on the Senate floor Thursday on the eve of eclipsing Strom Thurmond's 13,989-day (38 years, 3 months) tenure as a GOP senator. Stevens has already announced he'll run for a seventh full term next year, saying he has more work to do on health care, education, fisheries and infrastructure to help build Alaska's economy.

His critics call him the "King of Pork" for relentlessly "earmarking" taxpayer dollars to Alaska. In one recent year, according to the watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste, Stevens sent almost $1,000 per capita to Alaska, 30 times what went to the average state, based on population. Stevens makes no apologies for the billions of dollars he has sent to Alaska for port facilities, military barracks, water and sewer projects and the Alaska Railroad, just for starters.

Comment: Ted Stevens is the poster boy for the 17^th Amendment, in that he has garnered power for himself at the expense of his state legislators, while taking home a large disproportionate amount of federal tax dollars to such a small number of constituents.

The North American Union Steamroller

The weblog Gates of Vienna has a really interesting posting on the emergence of the North American Union being pushed by the internationalist. The posting is long, however it is very complete and worth a look at.

But it’s not the fifty states anymore. Can you sing “God Bless American…and Mexico and Canada”? If not, too bad, because it’s the number one hit song of below-the-radar appointed personnel who are even now at work on bringing this nightmare to your waking, working hours.

Special Interest Lobbys and Big Government

Special Interest Lobbys and Big Government; The Antiplanner; 12 April 2007.

From the weblog The Antiplanner:

The Washington Post has run a fascinating series of twenty-seven articles called Citizen K Street. It is best viewed as a history of Congressional lobbying for the past thirty years as viewed through the lense of one lobbyist’s career.

Another way of looking at the series is a glorification of one particular lobbyist, and several of the commenters obviously viewed it that way. They called the lobbyist a “corporate fascist” (even though his main clients were universities) and proposed various laws that would somehow end all lobbying and venality in DC.

The interesting thing to me is that the hero (or antihero) of the tale apparently invented lobbyist-initiated earmarking. Yes, Congress has earmarked funds for decades, but the earmarks were always initiated by members of Congress or by federal agencies. In this case, the lobbyist and his firm conceived the idea of finding universities and other institutions that were doing ordinary fundraising and saying, “Give us $10,000 a month, and we will convince Congress to give you $25 million.”

So who do we blame for this? The lobbyist? If so, the problem might be solved by banning lobbying or mandating more “transparency” in lobbying (which the antihero of the story supports).

Or should we blame Congress? If so, the problem might be solved with campaign finance reform.

The problem is that none of these are to blame, at least not by themselves. Instead, the real problem is the idea of big government — the idea that government can allocate resources efficiently. Once you accept this idea, you create and support the institutions that naturally lead to lobbying firms and the groups that hire them.

Read the rest here.

Comment: Many think that "big government" started during the Roosevelt Administration and World War II, however careful examination clearly points to the year 1913, when the 16^th and 17^th Amendments were enacted. The first allowed for Congress to take our money without redress and the second created an oligarchical group that would take this new found "wealth" and spend it on the growth of government. If the size of government is going to be truly reduced, then both of these amendments must be repealed.

Absentee Senators Running for President

Dear Senators: About Those Missed Votes... By: Carrie Budoff ; The Politico; April 9, 2007.

Dear John (and Joe and Sam, and Chris, too),

This is the Senate. Do we need to reassess our relationship?

Yes, you're running for president. It steals your time. You spend days and nights and weekends away from the congressional home front, courting admirers in Iowa and New Hampshire and South Carolina.

But what about voting, your chief chore in Washington?

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), you've been the scarcest of the Senate sextuplet, the chamber's largest class of presidential candidates in 20 years. You've missed one out of every three votes since January, according to Congressional Observer Publications, a nonpartisan database service.

Sens. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) and Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), you come around a bit more often, but not nearly as much as Senate apple-polishers Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.), homebodies by comparison. They've made it to all but three votes.

You probably think senators get a bum deal in presidential campaigns. Unlike governors and "Law & Order" stars, senators can be held accountable through their voting record if they skip out on their day job to eat hot dogs in Des Moines, Iowa.

Comment: Chances are extremely thin that any of these candidates will win the Presidency (Burden 2002), yet they will continue to pursue this quest at the expense of their electorate. If the states supported the repeal of the 17^th Amendment, legislatures could hold them accountable. At present, no one holds them accountable. And yet this is what the 17^th Amendment and more “democracy” has given us; unaccountable senators spending their time running for President.

_________________________________

Barry C. Burden; United States Senators as Presidential Candidates; Political Science Quarterly; Vol. 117, Number 1; 2002.