Back in November of 2007, Democratic activists in the California Democratic Party, aided by our friends at the Courage Campaign, drew up a resoution to Censure Senator Dianne Feinstein for her repeated enabling of the Bush agenda. This particular outcry was created by Senator Feinstein's swing vote on the Senate Judiciary Committee that allowed for the confirmation of our torture-loving Attorney General Bob Mukasey.
The Courage Campaign collected 33,000 signatures supporting a resolution to censure Dianne Feinstein for her pro-Bush votes. Needless to say, the efforts of those who actually support and defend the Constitution were met with great howls of execration by the serious people in the California Democratic Party.
But now that Senator Feinstein has once again sold the Constitution down the river by voting against removing telecom immunity from the FISA bill, it's time to ask: should the effort to censure Senator Feinstein be revived?
The Courage Campaign would like to know. More below the fold.
I knew that Senator Feinstein would be bad news regarding the telecom amnesty question way back in December when a form letter from her Senate office regarding the issue of telecom immunity in upcoming FISA legislation contained the following language:
Thank you for writing regarding the Bush Administration's request for legislation that would provide liability relief for telecommunications companies that are alleged to have provided assistance to the National Security Agency after September 11, 2001. I appreciate your thoughts on this topic, and welcome the opportunity to respond.
I hoped--sincerely hoped, for all our sakes--that all of our fears might be mistaken. After all, shortly before the recently passed "compromise" bill came to a vote, Senator Feinstein made a statement that she would support an amendment that required further review before granting liability:
I believe the court should not grant immunity without looking into the legality of the companies' actions. So if there is an amendment that does support this, I would intend to vote for it.
But when push came to shove, Dianne Feinstein voted against the amendment that would do just that. And then, she proceeded to join other Democrats in voting for cloture and for the final bill.
The question is, what are we going to do about it? And is this worthy of censure by the California Democratic Party?
Instead of telling you what you should think (that's what Republicans do), the Courage Campaign--which has been an effective advocate on a myriad of issues, including Blackwater and election reform--would like to know what you think.
They're doing a simple survey:
Should The Courage Campaign re-launch the censure resolution holding Sen. Feinstein accountable for her failures on FISA as well as her swing votes last year in favor of appointing Michael Mukasey and Leslie Southwick? Or should we drop the censure?
You get to cast your vote: yes or no.
Take the poll. And add a comment if you're so inclined.
As I wrote at the time, the previous push to pass a censure resolution stood no change of passage because the idea was conceived hastily and the resolution submitted after the required deadline, and such late resolutions require unanimous consent from the Resolutions Committee to even be heard. But if a resolution is submitted in a timely fashion with enough grassroots and netroots support, there is a very good chance that we will see a vigorous and highly publicized debate about Democratic values at the next meeting of the CDP Executive Board this fall in Orange County.
So cast your vote and let your voice be heard. That's what democracy is supposed to be about.