OMNI
PRESIDENTS’ DAY (PRESIDENTIAL POWER) NEWSLETTER #3, February 16,
2015; GEORGE WASHINGTON’S BIRTHDAY FEB. 22.
Compiled by Dick Bennett for a Culture of Peace and Justice.
(Third Mondays: #1 Feb.
18, 2013; #2 Feb. 17, 2014).
The Obama Presidency and sudden efflorescence of extreme hatred for government
by right-wing Republican Congress members have made the presidency seem weak
and Congress strong. But these
newsletters show circumstantially the long, gradual, increase of presidential
power, particularly in foreign policy.
Nothing the Tea Party has done during the past decade has changed any of
that, while Snowden’s revelations have shown the continued growth of executive
power during the Obama presidency.
OMNI NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL DAYS PROJECT
COMMODIFICATION OF OUR NATIONAL DAYS
One foundation of the OMNI’s
Days Project is dislike of the
excessive commercialization of many national days. Nothing seems free from profit-making,
including our national institutions, leaders, and heroes, resulting in reduced
wallet and mind. Even love has become a profit-making tool of
the Subaru Co.
“The 1968 manipulation of
Washington’s birthday so that it always falls on a Monday, and its hijacking
for marketing purposes as “Presidents’ Day,” renders that holiday fairly
meaningless to most.” Greg Harton,
“Getting Ready for the Fourth,” Northwest Arkansas
Newspapers (July 1, 2013).
Like Gandhi and King, we in
OMNI must be determined to change oppressive conditions, but especially the
causes—the political and social structures—of those conditions; otherwise we
are endlessly correcting symptoms, the same old same old. We may not be able to achieve radical change,
either in society or within ourselves, as did Gandhi and King, but at least we
can cease choosing to deal only with symptoms, and cease too all the irrelevant
distractions, or feeble, meaningless gestures, playing at protest. For we must take real, first, even if baby,
steps, or we will never be able to understand the commitment to change of Gandhi
and King. If we believe that certain
things must not be allowed— increasing executive power, another war, more
atmospheric warming--and that alternatives must be created, then we must grasp
tangible reality and act upon the facts we know.
“Only if one subscribes to the cult of the strong
Presidency. . . can one look with complacency on the growth of Presidential
dictatorship in foreign affairs.” “. .
.the totalitarianism toward which we are heading will be a home-grown
product.” J. William Fulbright, The
Crippled Giant ( Chapter 7). [Fulbright preferred a parliamentary system,
but while the separation of three powers existed he tried to keep it balanced.]
My blog: War
Department/Peace Department
Newsletters:
See OMNI Balance of Powers, Bush, Bill of Rights
Day, CIA, Civil Liberties, Congress, Constitution Day, Democracy, Drones, FBI,
Fascism, Fulbright, Geneva Conventions, Human Rights Day, Imperialism, Militarism,
National Security State
Presidents’ Day Newsletter #3 Feb.16,
2015
Veterans for Peace, Oppose Obama’s request for Authorization for Use
of Military Force (AUMF) against ISIL
Fred Branfman to Tulsa, Scholar of Presidents’ Secret Wars
FCNL, Repeal the 2011 Authorization for the Use of
Military Force.
Fulbright, The Crippled Giant, Decline
of Constitutional Democracy
Brands, Woodrow Wilson No Liberal Fascist
Stevenson, Militarization During Afghan and Iraq
Bachevich, Permanent War
Mann and Ornstein, Congress Failing
Crenson and Ginzberg, Presidential Power Unchecked
Wills, Bomb Power, President and National Security
State
Louis Fisher, Uncheck Presidential Power, the “Reynolds” Case
Julian Hattem (via Global Network), Congress Asks to See the Intelligence
Black Budget
Prins and Marshall, Treaties: President and Congress
Gardner
GLENN GREENWALD, NO PLACE TO HIDE, on Snowden, replete
with examples of excessive presidential power fueled by public fear (fueled by
official fear-mongering): “the post-9-11 veneration of security above all else
has created a climate particularly conducive to abuses of power” (p. 2).
VFP
Legislative Update: Dick, This President's Day, talk back to President Obama! Feb. 16, 2015
|
)
 |
|
||
|
||||
February, 2015
Dear Dick,
Take action this week to oppose
Obama’s request for Authorization for use of Military Force (AUMF) against
ISIL
We need a President whose actions match his words. Obama has said there is no military solution for the Middle East, yet this AUMF has no geographical boundaries, calls for the increased use of U.S. Special Forces on the ground, has a three-year renewable mandate and a broad definition of the "enemy." We do not need a new Authorization for the Use of Military Force, we need to repeal the AUMF of 2001. Military ‘solutions’ created our current problems, they will not solve them.
The
Senate will take up the issue this week.
Call your Senator through the Capitol Switchboard: 202- 224-3121
Tell your Senator
·
Make
diplomacy the number one priority.
Since it is clear there is no military solution, seriously engage with
everyone in the region, including Iran who is needed to force the Iraqi
government to be more inclusive with Sunni leaders. Without an inclusive
government in Iraq there is no way to effectively confront ISIL.
·
Initiate
a new effort at building a broad diplomatic solution in the United Nations to use diplomatic and financial
pressure to stop countries from financing and arming ISIL and other fighters
in Syria. An arms embargo on all sides should be on the long-term agenda.
·
Repeal
the AUMF of 2001
View VFP’s most recent statement on ISIL and
alternatives to a military response.
Please be attentive to
other items of interest to the VFP Mission that will be before the Congress
in the coming weeks:
·
Netanjahu speaking to Congress on March 3: There is an
ongoing campaign encouraging Members of Congress to be absent for Prime
Minister Netanjahu of Israel’s address to Congress.
·
Iran: Efforts to impose stiffer sanctions on Iran
continue. The Kirk Menendez bill S. 269 is one of
them. Increasing sanctions will make a negotiated agreement more
difficult to impossible.
Michael T. McPhearson |
|
WHAT: SPEAKER Fred Branfman
LEADING EXPERT ON U.S. EXECUTIVE SECRET
WAR ABROAD AND SURVEILLANCE AT HOME
WHEN: March
4 11:00 am. (TCC)
March 5 at 7:00 pm (TU)
WHERE: TULSA
Mar.
4 -Tulsa Community
College 11:00 am
Mar.
5 - University of Tulsa,
Chapman Hall, Lecture Hall 7:00 pm
LEADING
EXPERT ON U.S.
IN
TULSA
Fred Branfman, one of the nation's leading experts on U.S.
Executive Branch Secret War since revealing the U.S. Secret War in Laos to the world in 1969, will be speaking in Tulsa at the Tulsa
Community College University of Tulsa
"Americans need to understand the
phenomenon of 'U.S. Executive Secret War' both because it is becoming
the dominant mode of U.S. warmaking abroad, and our Executive Secret
Government is coming home in the form of surveillance and a variety of
other activities which create the potential for a domestic police state,"
he stated.
Branfman
is the author of "Presidential War in Laos: 1964-70" and has
published Voices From the Plain of Jars: Life Under An Air War, recently
reissued by the University of Wisconsin Press. It is the only book to emerge
from the Indochina War written by the peasants who comprised 95% of the
population, suffered most, but were heard from least. His work has appeared in
The New York Times, Washington Post, Harper's, The New Republic, Nation, and
many other publications.
Most
recently he has published over 20 articles on the Executive Branch's
"National Counterterrorism Strategy" throughout the Muslim World, and
Executive surveillance and other police activities in the United States.
"Although
the U.S. Executive justifies its warmaking by claiming it does so to enhance
national security, it has in fact weakened U.S. national security as never
before. As a result of its drone and ground assassination strategy its foes
have vastly gained in strength, most seriously in nuclear-armed Pakistan where U.S.
policy has strengthened our enemies, weakened our allies and, according to the
former U.S. Ambassador Anne Patterson, made it far more likely that nuclear
materials will fall into U.S. foes' hands.
"The
U.S. Executive Branch, without informing let alone obtaining the consent of
Congress or the American people, dropped 2 million tons of bombs on Laos, as
much as was dropped on all of Europe and the Pacific in WWII. But it still
lost, just as it is losing in Iraq, Afghanistan and throughout the Muslim world
after wasting $4 trillion that could have been used to create jobs at
home," he stated. And the human cost - over 20 million civilians killed,
wounded and made homeless by the U.S. Executive in Iraq
and Indochina alone - has been staggering.
In
addition to speaking at these two public events, Fred Branfman will be
available for interviews.
|
J. WILLIAM FULBRIGHT ON
PRESIDENTIAL POWER, PERMANENT WAR FOR “FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY” LOSS OF FREEDOM
AND DEMOCRACY.
The Crippled Giant.
Part II, chapters 6 and 7, deplore the rise of excessive executive and
the decline of congressional power in foreign affairs. The era of Cold War, of crisis after crisis
(the “jurisprudence of crisis”), of successive US invasions or interventions
has entrenched the unilateral power of the president for war and for treaties. The three main causes of the aggressive Imperial
Presidency and congressional passivity are 1) three decades of war, 2) the public’s
and their representatives’ loss of confidence in popular decision-making, and
3) executive secrecy (212-213). “Executive incursions upon Congress’s
foreign-policy powers has had three main results”: 1) Constitutional authority to initiate war
has passed from Congress to the executive.
2) Senate authority over treaties has been “reduced to near
nullity.” 3) The Senate’s “advise and
consent” function has been drastically diminished (208-209). --Dick
FULBRIGHT AND TREATIES, GOOGLE
SEARCH
1.
J. William
Fulbright Speaks -
Digital Collections - University of ...
James William Fulbright,
Democratic Senator from Arkansas
1.
The Fulbright Premise: Senator J. William
Fulbright's Views on ...
books.google.com/books?isbn=0838713580
Naomi B. Lynn, Arthur F. McClure - 1973 - Executive power
claimed, the treaty-making power was perhaps the most urgent reason for ... the Constitutional Convention.8 Fulbright was not concerned about presidential ...
2.
J. William
Fulbright Speaks -
Digital Collections - University of ...
James William Fulbright,
Democratic Senator from Arkansas
3.
Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
John Pastore, W. Averell
Harriman, Sen. George Smathers, Sen. J.W. Fulbright, Sec. of State Dean Rusk,
Sen. George Aiken, President Kennedy, Sen. Hubert H.
4.
[PDF]
sidestepping
congress: presidents acting under the - Louis Fisher
probation of the
Senate" the power of making treaties, the Senate. ) would have
the ....A
resolution introduced by Congressman J. William Fulbright. (D-Ark.)
also ...
5.
NYT Why the World is Better for Jesse Helms - University
of Delaware
Presidents and secretaries of state court the powerful
Senator Helms the way Harry ...of state,
Dean Rusk, cursed Senator J. William Fulbright during the Vietnam War. ...and gave the Senate power to confirm ambassadors and ratify treaties.
6.
[PDF]
International
Commitments in an Era of Unilateral Presidential - Sara ...
by BC Prins - Related articles
A Comparison of the Treaties and Executive Agreements Negotiated by the ... evident with the expansion of presidential power in the areas of foreign affairs and .....isolationists led by
Senators J. William Fulbright (D-Ark.), Sam Ervin (D-NC), ...
7.
[PDF]
International Commitments in an Era of Unilateral Presidential Power
ir.uiowa.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1033&context=shambaugh
by BC Prins - 2006 - Related articles
-J. William Fulbright. The use
of executive agreements has clearly changed over time.
Initially employed for minor modifications to treaties already in existence, ...
8.
The Pentagon Propaganda Machine by Senator J. William
Fulbright
The situation is such that
last year Senator Allen J. Ellender
of Louisiana, ... but it must invariably and immeasurably
increase the powers of civil government; ..... from treatiesthan to those deriving
from executive agreements and even simple, ...
9.
On What Legal Basis Did Truman Act? - Berkeley Law
If that were possible, the President and the Senate could rely on the treaty process to... He noted that the Senate's constitutional power in the past had been used ... by J.William
Fulbright (D., Ark.)
to support the concept of a United Nations.
10. [PDF]
Foreign Relations, Strategic Doctrine, and Presidential Power
by D Gartner - Cited by 1 - Related articles
Feb 26, 2012 - World War II,6 and the treaty power was the central mechanism for the...... J. William Fulbright, Congress,
the President and the War Power, ...
Hold Your labels
February
3, 2011 at 3:28 a.m.
·
E-mail
·
·
·
Pity poor Woodrow Wilson. The man who
tried to save the world from tyranny is now being excoriated as a liberal
fascist by the likes of Glenn Beck, Jonah Goldberg, and other
conservatives. This story is only
available from the archives. Click here to
contact the online desk. Editorial,
Pages 14 on 02/03/2011
[Dick:
Part of the article explains the
increase of presidential/administrative power during WWI and during wars in
general, but Wilson
remained an internationalist and was no “liberal fascist” as he has been
labeled by some.]
MILITARIZATION DURING AFGHAN
AND IRAQ
Jonathan Stevenson. “Owned by the Army: Has the President Lost
Control of His Generals?” Harper’s Magazine (May 2011). A quick history of the growing power of the Pentagon,
presidents’ struggles with high officers, and the extraordinary power of General Petraeus: the “compromise of civilian control….the
logical outcome of a national policy based on endless war.” The disaster to our democracy by the
ascendancy of military power has resulted in “a civilian leadership
increasingly likely to internalize military priorities and attitudes.” --Dick
[Stevenson’s defense of a civilian president’s control of the military
seems undermined by his own argument.]
--Bacevich, Andrew. Washington
Rules: America
Regardless of the president or party, the basic edifice of
the U.S. National Security State (NSS) has remained unchanged: 1) a worldwide
military presence; 2) armed forces not for defense but for dominance; and 3)
intervention in other nations from influencing elections to military invasion
(over 40 since1945 according to William Blum in Killing Hope and Rogue State U.S. and to the world. A new national security policy is
possible--that rejects militarism and foreign aggression and their enormous
waste of lives and resources without producing “national security,”, and
embraces a policy of helping humans in the U. S. and then abroad. Bacevich does not discuss climate change,
but its certain global disruptions reinforce his arguments for seeking a new
National Security before anarchy can commence. -- Dick.
From Publishers Weekly
U.S. Army colonel turned
academic, Bacevich (The Limits of Power) offers
an unsparing, cogent, and important critique of assumptions guiding American
military policy. These central tenets, the "Washington
rules"--such as the belief that the world order depends on America maintaining a massive military capable
of rapid and forceful interventions anywhere in the world--have dominated
national security policy since the start of the cold war and have condemned the
U.S. America 's defeat in Vietnam Washington
Mann, Thomas and Norman Ornstein. The
Broken Branch: How Congress Is Failing America
From Publishers Weekly
Until recently, one could be
forgiven for thinking that the present Congress is essentially an arm of the
Bush administration, according to Mann and Ornstein, nationally renowned
congressional scholars from the Brookings Institution and the American
Enterprise Institute, respectively. Their book argues persuasively that
relentless partisanship and a disregard for institutional procedures have led
Congress to be more dysfunctional than at any time in recent memory. Looking
back to the arbitrary and sometimes authoritarian leadership of Democratic
speaker Jim Wright and the Abscam scandals of the 1980s, the authors
demonstrate how they presage the much worse abuses of power committed by former
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay and superlobbyist Jack Abramoff. In outlining
more than 200 years of congressional history, Mann and Ornstein sometimes allow
just a sentence or two to explain the policies and philosophies of an important
politician or even an entire party, even as they catalogue deviations from
obscure points of procedure in extensive detail. Their book may be useful and
enjoyable to the specialist, though recent conservative pushback on issues from
the Harriet Miers nomination to warrantless wiretapping and immigration will
make some wish the authors had had the opportunity to add a postscript.
Crenson,
Matthew and Benjamin Ginsberg. Presidential Power: Unchecked & Unbalanced. Norton, 2007.
From Booklist
As envisioned by our founders,
the office of chief executive was to exercise primarily a supervisory role,
curbing the excesses of a popularly elected legislature. During wartime, of
course, the powers of the executive were expected to increase. However, as
Arthur Schlesinger indicated in The Imperial Presidency (1973), the
powers of the presidency have vastly expanded, even in peacetime. Crenson and
Ginsberg, both political science professors, explain the reasons and
consequences. They convincingly assert that the decline in popular
participation in our political life has led to a dangerous power vacuum, this
manifesting itself most clearly in the diminished role of political parties in
selecting presidential candidates. Instead, presidential candidates today are
generally able to define themselves without being moored to the beliefs of
their party; thus, if elected, they feel free to pursue their own agendas. At
the same time, the public withdrawal from politics has undermined both the
prestige and the power of Congress. The result is a great increase in the power
of the presidency, abetted by an accelerating expansion of the bureaucratic
state. Jay Freeman
Gary
Wills, BOMB POWER :The Modern
Presidency and the National
Security State Washington
Gary Wills begins his provocative account of the atomic bomb's impact on the
republic with a high-detonation assertion. "The Bomb," he writes, "altered our subsequent history
down to its deepest constitutional roots," redefining the presidency in ways that the Constitution does not
intend. "It fostered an anxiety of continuing crisis, so that society
was pervasively militarized. It redefined the government as a National Security
State
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Global
Network [globalnet@mindspring.com]
Thursday, February
13, 2014 12:21 PM
February 12, 2014, 03:53 pm
Lawmakers want to see the ‘black budget’
By Julian Hattem
Dozens of House lawmakers want the Obama administration to
release the secret “black budget” used to fund intelligence agencies.
A bipartisan
group of 62 members of Congress wrote President Obama a letter on Wednesday
asking him to release the fiscal 2015 spending levels for 16 federal spy
agencies when he delivers the rest of his budget to Congress on March 4.
“The current
practice of providing no specificity whatsoever regarding the overall budget
requests for each intelligence agency falls woefully short of basic
accountability requirements,” the legislators wrote.
“As you develop your fiscal year 2015 budget, we strongly urge you to take a simple step toward much needed transparency by including the total amount requested for each of the sixteen intelligence agencies. We believe the top line number for each agency should be made public, with no risk to national security, for comparative purposes across all federal government agencies.”
Wednesday’s request was led by Reps. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) and Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), who last month introduced the Intelligence Budget Transparency Act. The bill would require the administration to release basic details about the spy agencies’ budgets.
The federal
government has disclosed the overall amount of money spent to fund the
intelligence community since 2007, but has kept classified more specific
details about the individual budgets of agencies like the CIA, FBI and National
Security Agency (NSA).
Documents
released by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden last year showed that the CIA
has grown to eat up about 28 percent of the $52.6 billion spent in 2013. The
$14.7 billion it received was about 50 percent more than the NSA’s
funding.
The White House
did not immediately respond to an inquiry from The Hill about the lawmakers'
request.
Global
Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
globalnet@mindspring.com
www.space4peace.org
http://space4peace.blogspot.com/ (blog)
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
globalnet@mindspring.com
www.space4peace.org
http://space4peace.blogspot.com/ (blog)
Treaties: Congress vs. President
International Commitments in
an Era of Unilateral Presidential Power
A Comparison of the Treaties and Executive Agreements Negotiated by the
Administrations of George W. Bush and Theodore Roosevelt by Brandon C. Prins,
Texas Tech University & Bryan W. Marshall Miami University
Paper prepared for the Shambaugh
Conference, “Building Synergies Institutions and Cooperation in World
Politics,” October 12-15, University of Iowa.
ABSTRACT
Treaty-making involves the constitutional struggle for policy control.
Both Congress and the president are defined as official actors in the making of
international commitments, and both closely guard their constitutionally
defined roles. Yet extant scholarship generally concludes Congress rarely
matters in establishing U.S. formal commitments abroad. Indeed, it is
frequently pointed out that only 21 treaties have been voted down by the U.S.
Senate in its 230 year existence. While true, such a figure presents an
incomplete picture of congressional influence. Presidents may covet greater
institutional capacity to direct unilaterally U.S. foreign policy, but
opposition in both the House and Senate frequently reins in an uncompromising
White House. In this paper we compare the international commitments made by
Presidents George W. Bush (2001-2004) and Theodore Roosevelt (1901-1909). We
find the Senate’s role in influencing and/or altering treaties has been
under-estimated in most analyses. While the Senate rarely rejects a treaty
negotiated by the president with a recorded floor vote, the Senate can and does
attach amendments and reservations to treaties that affect U.S. obligations and
responsibilities. More importantly, though, and even less recognized are
treaties killed by the Senate through inaction. At least 21 treaties during
Roosevelt’s administration were rejected by the Senate, none of them by a
formal floor vote. By ignoring Senate influence before an official floor vote
risks under-estimating the influence the Senate has on U.S. commitments abroad.
This paper also explores the domestic political authority under which
presidents negotiate international agreements. Most scholars conclude that
international agreements signal unilateral presidential power. Yet, many are
negotiated pursuant to congressional statutes or previously ratified treaties.
In both cases, Congress maintains influence over the process.
Killing
Machine: The American Presidency in the
Age of Drone Warfare by LLOYD C. GARDNER
FROM THE “DEVASTATINGLY EFFECTIVE” (ANDREW BACEVICH) CHRONICLER OF
AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY, A SCATHING NEW ASSESSMENT OF THE AMERICAN PRESIDENCY
AND U.S.
Thomas E.
Donilon, the national security advisor, remarked that what surprised him the
most about Obama in office was: “He’s a president who is quite comfortable with
the use of force on behalf of the United States.” —FROM KILLING
MACHINE
With
Obama’s election to the presidency in 2008, many believed the United States had entered a new era: Obama came
into office with high expectations that he would end the war in Iraq and initiate a new foreign policy that
would reestablish American values and the United States
In this shattering new assessment, historian Lloyd C. Gardner argues that, despite cosmetic changes, Obama has simply built on the expanding power base of presidential power that reaches back across decades and through multiple administrations. The new president ended the “enhanced interrogation” policy of the Bush administration but did not abandon the concept of preemption. Obama withdrew fromIraq Gardner
Killing Machine skillfully narrates the drawdown inIraq , the counterinsurgency
warfare in Afghanistan Gardner
In this shattering new assessment, historian Lloyd C. Gardner argues that, despite cosmetic changes, Obama has simply built on the expanding power base of presidential power that reaches back across decades and through multiple administrations. The new president ended the “enhanced interrogation” policy of the Bush administration but did not abandon the concept of preemption. Obama withdrew from
Killing Machine skillfully narrates the drawdown in
Praise
for Killing
Machine:
“Gardner
—PUBLISHERS
WEEKLY (STARRED REVIEW)
Lloyd C. Gardner is Professor Emeritus of History at Rutgers University and the author or editor of more than a dozen books, including The Long Road to Baghdad and Three Kings (both available from The New Press). He lives in
Pub Date: Fall 2013
Format: hardcover
Trim: 5 1/2 x 8 1/4, 304 pages
ISBN: 978-1-59558-918-7
Format: hardcover
Trim: 5 1/2 x 8 1/4, 304 pages
ISBN: 978-1-59558-918-7
Home / About Us / Contact Us / Privacy Policy
Copyright © 2013 The New Press
Copyright © 2013 The New Press
Contents #1 Feb. 18/22, 2013
350.org 2012 AND 2013 actions
Dick: What Is Presidents’ Day?
Wills: Presidential Bomb Power
Conason: It Is Happening
Mayer: War on Terror = War on US
Scheer: “Defense” (= War) Hawks and 9-11
Daniel Ellsberg, Interview: Presidential Unconstitutional Abuse of War
Power
Contents Presidents’
DAY, Presidential Powers Newsletter #2
Fulbright on Separation of Powers
Louis Fisher, Unchecked
Presidential Power
Wolf, The End of
America: Fascist Shift
Boyle, Protesting
Power
Chalmers Johnson, Blowback Trilogy
Kinski, Obama’s 2008 Victory
Kuttner, A Presidency
in Peril: Obama and Money
Osgood and Frank, Selling
War
Petras and Morley, Empire
or Republic
Schlesinger, The
Imperial Presidency
Shesol, Roosevelt vs.
the Supreme Court
Swanson, Daybreak
Democracy Now, “CIA
‘Torture Flight’ Program”
OMNI Forums on Presidential Power
No comments:
Post a Comment