As a progressive Wisconsinite, I often feel spoiled by the quality leadership emanating from U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold’s office. Mr. Feingold is that rare sort of politician, from any political party, who is truly willing to stand strong behind his principles no matter the political efficacy of the situation. When historians look back on these dark days, they will remember Mr. Feingold was the first Senate Democrat to call for a troop withdrawal from Iraq and that he also composed a solo filibuster, despite a lack of any Democratic support, against renewal of the Patriot Act. In the meantime, though, Mr. Feingold continues to be far ahead of the conventional wisdom that got us into this mess in the first place.
The difference between Mr. Feingold and other Democrats in Congress can be seen in the fallout from his attempt to censure the Bush administration this past June. Mr. Feingold compiled a short list of particularly galling actions by the administration relating to either their misconduct in the war in Iraq or their attack on the rule of law at home, and he wished to register Congress’ condemnation of such actions. “At my town hall meetings, online and everywhere I go, I hear the American people demanding that the president and his administration be held accountable for their misconduct, both with regard to the disastrous war in Iraq and their flagrant abuse of the rule of law,” Mr. Feingold said in a July news release. “Censure is a relatively modest response, but one that puts Congress on record condemning their actions, both for the American people today and for future generations.”
Not surprisingly, Mr. Feingold was lambasted by both the left and right for the insidious suggestion that any sort of accountability could ever come to pass in the la-la land of the Washington, D.C., power structure. In fairness to the Democratic Party, though, the conventional wisdom inside the Beltway still seems to be that the issues Mr. Feingold cited — including Mr. Bush overstating the case for war with Iraq and ordering warrantless wiretaps against American citizens — aren’t important enough to even warrant an investigation (despite being, you know, impeachable).
Last week, once again, Mr. Feingold sided with the rule of law as he fought the passage of FISA renewal legislation that would have provided retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies. This bill would have prevented both the telecoms and the Bush administration from ever having to be legally accountable for what should be considered a high crime — namely, our government wiretapping Americans without warrants. This massive display of lawbreaking was only possible due to the complicity of those members of the telecommunications industry, and both the Bush administration and his enablers in Congress are actively looking to end any sort of investigation or attempt to impose accountability. As the majority of the Senate Intelligence Committee, no doubt fearing retribution from our country’s boy-king, collectively rolled on their backs and pissed themselves, Mr. Feingold supported Sen. Chris Dodd’s, D-Conn., hold on the bill and vowed to “fight it vigorously with every tool at [his] disposal.”
The retroactive-immunity aspect of this bill essentially says that corporations who break the law only need Congress to pass a special law that legalizes their lawbreaking conduct in order to be completely off the hook. The very concept of it is so corrupt that the late Sen. Robert Kennedy, D-N.Y., a former attorney general, objected to the very philosophy of it back in 1965. This was the last time such a concept was even suggested, as Mr. Kennedy’s warnings that such a precedent could logically be applied to “murder or any other crime” had been taken seriously until now.
Retroactive immunity subverts the system of checks and balances of our government, removing the shield that protects the judicial branch from executive or legislative branch manipulation. Yet our Democratic-controlled Congress nearly allowed its passage anyway. One would think there would be unity among the Democratic Party to prevent this, yet a large contingent of Democrats seem much more interested in kowtowing to the administration once again, especially considering the potential reciprocity from an industry poised to be publicly punished and exposed for betraying their customers’ rights.
Already, power brokers such as Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., have seen their campaign coffers flooded with money from various telecoms, and it appears as if many of his colleagues have also received the memo (if not the bribes and contributions).
I fear that it is a truly tragic state of affairs that the Democratic Party is far more concerned with throwing a lifeline to the telecom industry, and sinking any hopes of accountability through the judicial system, as opposed to pursuing any sort of even mild accountability for the administration’s warrantless wiretapping.
Thankfully, so far there have been enough leaders like Mr. Feingold who remain committed to the rule of law, even above party loyalty, to at least stall this particular bill. However, there haven’t been nearly enough leaders with this sort of character to allow the passage of an official censure of the administration for its crimes, much less passing bills that could solve vital issues like the Feingold-Reid Iraq redeployment legislation. Until the Democrats learn from Mr. Feingold and recognize that true leaders have the courage to stand up both for their convictions as well as for the rights of the American people, I fear these dark times will continue even if power shifts into Democratic hands.
Harry Waisbren ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in communication arts.
