Given that the constitution calls for impeachment if high crimes or misdemeanors have been committed, and the current president has flouted constitutionally mandated checks and balances, why is impeachment off the table? How do you intend to not give him free reign if you remove one of the only constitutionally given ways of limiting a president's abuse of his authority?
Corporate donors are shifting their political giving dramatically to Democrats in Congress. Sen. Barack Obama's small donor "revolution" is a promising development, but 90% of the money given to congressional candidates still comes from larger donations. Will you make passage of a public financing law that provides incentives for small donations a priority in the next Congress?
Every day in the U.S. 10,000 young people get an STD, 2,400 become pregnanct, and 55 contract HIV. The Bush administration has pushed abstinence-only sex education programs that prohibit information about condoms and birth control. Why are you on record supporting Chairman David Obey's continued funding for these programs when your own congressional evaluation showed they have "no impact on teen behavior" and a report ...more »
Every day in the U.S. 10,000 young people get an STD, 2,400 become pregnanct, and 55 contract HIV. The Bush administration has pushed abstinence-only sex education programs that prohibit information about condoms and birth control. Why are you on record supporting Chairman David Obey's continued funding for these programs when your own congressional evaluation showed they have "no impact on teen behavior" and a report by Congressman Waxman showed that 80% of abstinence-only curricula contian "false or misleading" information. What possible rationale could exist for the Democratic congressional leadership promoting ignorance in the era of AIDS?
« less full details »
If impeachment doesn't happen while President Bush and Vice President Cheney are in office, would you support Investigation into criminal activity after they are out of office? How would such a prosecution work?
The single most important task of Congress is to protect and defend the Constitution. A strong Constitution protects the Nation, and thus We The People and as such, is paramount for our national security. Congress is the voice, the will, the protector, and the conscious of We The People. Given the Congress' acquiescence to all measure of executive overreaching for the past 7-1/2 years, what will the Congress finally do ...more »
The single most important task of Congress is to protect and defend the Constitution. A strong Constitution protects the Nation, and thus We The People and as such, is paramount for our national security. Congress is the voice, the will, the protector, and the conscious of We The People. Given the Congress' acquiescence to all measure of executive overreaching for the past 7-1/2 years, what will the Congress finally do to restore the balance of power by reigning in a near-unitary executive, by holding them to account for any crimes committed against the Constitution and against We The People, and by using punitive measures to prevent such crimes from ever happening again? Given the past 7-1/2 years, what assurances can you give us that crimes against the Constitution and the American people will not be swept under the rug to be repeated by a future administration, dangerously emboldened by history's precedent of getting away with it?
« less full details »
If private insurance is given a place in universal health care, a lot of money will go to their profits, overhead, waste, etc. We already have the most expensive health care system in the world. If we cut out the health insurance companies, the savings can be used to take care of sick people. It works better. Medicare is a success with low overhead and is cheaper than Medicare Advantage, the private insurance scam ...more »
If private insurance is given a place in universal health care, a lot of money will go to their profits, overhead, waste, etc. We already have the most expensive health care system in the world. If we cut out the health insurance companies, the savings can be used to take care of sick people. It works better. Medicare is a success with low overhead and is cheaper than Medicare
Advantage, the private insurance scam that was forced on us by the Republicans.
Please comment on why Single Payer gets no serious consideration in Congress.
« less full details »
There has been a lot of discussion about universal health care in the Democratic primary, but little word from those in Congress regarding the future of such legislation. Do you think Congress will be able to pass universal health care with a Democratic President in the White House, and how long will it take to make that happen?
It has become fairly apparent to all Americans that the budgets of defense and homeland security are gigantic boondoggles, designed to funnel money directly to the GOP and its supporters. The corruption larded throughout this Administration's history has not only eliminated our 2000-era surplus, but has impoverished our nation. We are told we cannot invest in health care, education, retirement, energy research, infrastructure ...more »
It has become fairly apparent to all Americans that the budgets of defense and homeland security are gigantic boondoggles, designed to funnel money directly to the GOP and its supporters. The corruption larded throughout this Administration's history has not only eliminated our 2000-era surplus, but has impoverished our nation.
We are told we cannot invest in health care, education, retirement, energy research, infrastructure care - even federal firefighting! - because we are so broke.
If this were a business, the stockholders would demand a full investigation, complete with forensic accountants, to trace and recover these stolen funds, no matter where they were hidden. We cannot allow the criminals who have broken this nation to escape with their loot intact!
Can you detail how you plan to uncover the extent of these massive thefts, and use the full force of the US government to get the people's money back? Only recovering our ill-spent taxes can give us the funds we need for the future.
« less full details »
In order to restore a three-branches-of-government-style democracy/republic, BUSH/CHENEY MUST BE IMPEACHED! We are paying you to defend our Constitution, and you are failing miserably by ignoring this administration's many crimes. We've lost so much...how can you sit by while Rove and others IGNORE a Congressional subpoena? How could you pass that awful FISA law? Don't you see how this executive branch is grabbing unprecedented ...more »
In order to restore a three-branches-of-government-style democracy/republic, BUSH/CHENEY MUST BE IMPEACHED! We are paying you to defend our Constitution, and you are failing miserably by ignoring this administration's many crimes. We've lost so much...how can you sit by while Rove and others IGNORE a Congressional subpoena? How could you pass that awful FISA law? Don't you see how this executive branch is grabbing unprecedented power? This is a TURNING POINT IN U.S. HISTORY. DO THE RIGHT THING!
BTW, is there a worse crime imaginable than deliberately lying to start a war in which hundreds of thousands of people die? Please tell me what crime is worse! It's mass murder. Where is your conscience?
« less full details »
When are you going to hold Bush and Cheney accountable for breaking the law, for ignoring requests for documents, for using executive priviledge when it doesn't apply, for its incompetent handling of every domestic or foreign policy?
Why haven't you investigated this? Bush's entire excuse for spying on Americans was that he was trying to protect us from the terrorists who attacked us. But the spying started well before that and you don't seem to care about that fact!
What possible reason would the neo-cons (with the assistance of the telecoms) have had for spying on Americans in violation of the law prior to 9-11?
Speaker Pelosi, More Americans are dying daily due to either a complete lack of Health Insurance or having coverage of procedures and drugs denied by their "for profit" insurance companies than are dying in the war in Iraq. Why then has the Democratic congress not moved forward with a Single Payer Universal Health Care plan for all Americans? Also, Will you commit to leading this fight in the next congress and ...more »
Speaker Pelosi,
More Americans are dying daily due to either a complete lack of Health Insurance or having coverage of procedures and drugs denied by their "for profit" insurance companies than are dying in the war in Iraq.
Why then has the Democratic congress not moved forward with a Single Payer Universal Health Care plan for all Americans?
Also, Will you commit to leading this fight in the next congress and if not please explain why the deaths of thousand of Americans don't matter?
Finally, should you not be able to push Single Payer Health Care through will you at least require in any compromise bill that any insurer who denies coverage of a physician requested action or prescribed medication is committing a felony resulting in a minimum of 10 years jail time to the CEO/President of the company?
« less full details »
Will you give up you congressional health care benfits and purchase health insurance in the private market, as over 40 million americans are expected to do?
Why won't you let the impeachment of these two go forward? There are 10's of thousands of Americans that want them impeached. Look at the lying the spying the acconomy, the war, all of the stuff they have done to the American people. You most let the impeachment go forward. Why won't you?
If not, why not?
This should be an interesting week.
Madam Speaker, I'm one of your constituents in San Francisco. I don't need to own a car in this great city, but I've noticed that going out-of-town is slow and cumbersome without one. Will Amtrak be improved during my lifetime? It may not be profitable, but the highway system sure isn't profitable! When will we see high-speed rail on the West Coast? Mexico's getting it. France has it. Why can't we get it, too? Thanks. ...more »
Madam Speaker, I'm one of your constituents in San Francisco. I don't need to own a car in this great city, but I've noticed that going out-of-town is slow and cumbersome without one. Will Amtrak be improved during my lifetime? It may not be profitable, but the highway system sure isn't profitable! When will we see high-speed rail on the West Coast? Mexico's getting it. France has it. Why can't we get it, too? Thanks.
« less full details »
Speaker Pelosi, When you championed the new FISA legislation through the house recently, you stated that "there is no inherent authority of the president to do whatever he wants. This is a democracy, not a monarchy" even though "whatever he wants" is exactly what George Bush has done for the past 7 1/2 years in violation of multiple laws and without a shred of accountability from you or anyone else, which gives him the ...more »
Speaker Pelosi,
When you championed the new FISA legislation through the house recently, you stated that "there is no inherent authority of the president to do whatever he wants. This is a democracy, not a monarchy" even though "whatever he wants" is exactly what George Bush has done for the past 7 1/2 years in violation of multiple laws and without a shred of accountability from you or anyone else, which gives him the defacto authority to do precisely "whatever he wants". Why do you expect the Bush administration to adhere to this new law when they have repeatedly ignored the existing law and any other law that they find inconvenient? In other words, if they ignored the old law without consequence, what makes you so certain that they won't simply ignore the new law as well and if they do ignore the new law, what recourse do you have to reign them in considering that this congress has failed in each and every instance with regard to the White House to enforce their own subpoenas and you yourself removed impeachment from the table? What real consequences will the Bush administration - or any other future administration - face for ignoring the new FISA law aside from a sternly worded letter?
« less full details »
A lot of people have been upset over the perceived "bending over like a blade of grass in a light breeze" the Democratic-controlled congress has been engaged in every time the Bush administration trumpets out its tried and true "Ooooh! Terrorists! Booogabooogaboooo! Terrorists!! BoooogaBooogaBooo!" line. We're especially concerned over the so-called compromise of telecom amnesty and FISA and its fig leaves that ...more »
A lot of people have been upset over the perceived "bending over like a blade of grass in a light breeze" the Democratic-controlled congress has been engaged in every time the Bush administration trumpets out its tried and true "Ooooh! Terrorists! Booogabooogaboooo! Terrorists!! BoooogaBooogaBooo!" line.
We're especially concerned over the so-called compromise of telecom amnesty and FISA and its fig leaves that only allow a court to decide if the Bush administration asked them to break the law. This doesn't protect our privacy or rights to due process . . . well . . . at all really, and certainly doesn't help to bring to light any of the corruption or abuse of power we suspect was going on.
Why do you keep selling us up the river?
And, as a follow up, will you please stop?
Please?
« less full details »
Madame Speaker: The principal reasons that the NetRoots have fought so hard against telecom immunity in the FISA update legistation is that (a) we want to know how egregiously the government and its private sector partners have violated our Fourth Amendment rights and (b) we want to see those responsible for crimes against the Constitution held accountable. Do you foresee this ever happening? If so how? If not, how ...more »
Madame Speaker:
The principal reasons that the NetRoots have fought so hard against telecom immunity in the FISA update legistation is that (a) we want to know how egregiously the government and its private sector partners have violated our Fourth Amendment rights and (b) we want to see those responsible for crimes against the Constitution held accountable. Do you foresee this ever happening? If so how? If not, how can you claim to be defending and upholding the Constitution?
« less full details »
It is within the power of Congress to amend the Evidence Code and the Rules of Court to prevent lawyers from citing presidential signing statements in their pleadings, and prevent federal courts from giving them evidentiary weight. (As with a "decertified" decision of the California Supreme Court, they would be free to make the same arguments - they just can't mention that those arguments were in a signing statement.) ...more »
It is within the power of Congress to amend the Evidence Code and the Rules of Court to prevent lawyers from citing presidential signing statements in their pleadings, and prevent federal courts from giving them evidentiary weight. (As with a "decertified" decision of the California Supreme Court, they would be free to make the same arguments - they just can't mention that those arguments were in a signing statement.) Will you be seeking to enact such legislation in the near future?
« less full details »
Karl Rove is saying "f" off to you, the constitution, and the American People. Arrest him today and prove you have the balls as a leader.
Dear Madam Speaker: How is it appropriate to retroactively indemnify conduct that has almost certainly infringed on the 4th Amendment privacy rights of American citizens without even attempting to investigate what has happened in an open session of Congress? Don't We, the People, deserve to know exactly how we are being surveilled before the telecom providers are given carte blanche for their activities? How much of ...more »
Dear Madam Speaker:
How is it appropriate to retroactively indemnify conduct that has almost certainly infringed on the 4th Amendment privacy rights of American citizens without even attempting to investigate what has happened in an open session of Congress? Don't We, the People, deserve to know exactly how we are being surveilled before the telecom providers are given carte blanche for their activities? How much of our taxpayer dollars have been paid to the telecoms to allow the NSA to spy on us? If the Administration will invoke state secrets and executive privilege, surely the telecom officials have no right to do so and could provide us with the information if properly subpoenaed. Surely the Congress could also subpoena the rulings from the FISC that precipitated this whole mess last year?
IF ILLEGAL SURVEILLANCE IS GOING TO BE WIPED AWAY BY CONGRESSIONAL FIAT, DON'T YOU AT LEAST OWE US AN ANSWER AS TO WHAT EXACTLY IS BEING DONE TO 'PROTECT US'?
« less full details »
Does congress plan to setup a 'blue-ribbon' (whatever) commission that would explore and put in the public domain a number of Bush administration actions that were undertaken during the past 8-odd years. Topics include, (1) Spying/FISA (2) Iraq war (3) Unitary Executive (4) DOJ shenanigans. If this is not done BEFORE the elections, we the people and congress will never find out. Since it will be politically impossible ...more »
Does congress plan to setup a 'blue-ribbon' (whatever) commission that would explore and put in the public domain a number of Bush administration actions that were undertaken during the past 8-odd years. Topics include, (1) Spying/FISA (2) Iraq war (3) Unitary Executive (4) DOJ shenanigans. If this is not done BEFORE the elections, we the people and congress will never find out. Since it will be politically impossible for a new Obama administration to do this. If it is setup now, and even if Bush does not cooperate we can hope for the Obama administration to cooperate.
Can congress do this? Do you intend to? If yes, by when?
« less full details »
Even if impeachment of Bush, Cheney, and others is still off the table, is censure off the table also?
Why aren't Democrats supporting legalizing hemp? Hemp can provide fuels, foods, fibers, medicines and can be used recreationally--the most benign of all substances. Hemp fuels can give us energy independence from fossil fuels and foreign oils. Hemp can provide a renewable and sustainable source of products. Hemp planted in April can be ready for harvest in August. It'd be ready for the pyrolytic processing facility ...more »
Why aren't Democrats supporting legalizing hemp? Hemp can provide fuels, foods, fibers, medicines and can be used recreationally--the most benign of all substances.
Hemp fuels can give us energy independence from fossil fuels and foreign oils. Hemp can provide a renewable and sustainable source of products.
Hemp planted in April can be ready for harvest in August. It'd be ready for the pyrolytic processing facility by December. Fuels could be on the way to the pumps by Christmas or shortly after New Year's.
Now how does that compare to having to wait five or more years to realize any benefit from off-shore drilling for oil as the Repugs advocate?
« less full details »
Social Web