Checks & Balances in US: Change in the Air?
Mar 17th, 2007 | 7 responses
During my college days when I studied political science (and even later in life), what fascinated me most while going through various constitutions in the world, was the US system of ‘checks and balances’ to ensure maximum freedom in all aspects of American life. There have been challenges in the past (and present) but somehow this provision helps the US triumph over odds.
Interestingly, ‘Separation of Powers’, a term coined by French political Enlightenment thinker Baron de Montesquieu, is a model for the governance of democratic states.
Montesquieu’s two most important works are The Persian Letters and The Spirit of Laws. These works share certain themes — most notably a fascination with non-European societies and a horror of despotism.
There is an interesting discussion here…
And it is always good to jog our memories…
I don’t want to bore you further…There is an interesting article in the San Francisco Chronicle about the light at the end of the tunnel…that checks and balances have finally returned in the USA’s capital after six years of one-party rule.
“The shift in power has made it impossible for the White House to control a series of scandals in recent weeks, from the mistreatment of injured soldiers at Walter Reed Army Medical Center to the controversial firings of eight federal prosecutors.
“The change was clear the day after the Nov. 7 elections, when Bush dismissed Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Democrats had called for Rumsfeld’s dismissal for years, but it was the voters’ clearly expressed anger over the Iraq war that forced the move.
“In recent weeks, the controversies have snowballed, prompting the usually assertive White House to play defense…”
7 Responses to “Checks & Balances in US: Change in the Air?”
I would guess that sometime this summer will be the last time that anyone on the left (like the San Francisco Chronicle) mention separation of powers.
When either Senators Clinton or Obama win the presidency there will be no hand wrining in the media (except for the right of center talk radio or bloggers) about separation of powers. In 2010 when the Democrats get more than 60 seats in the Senatate, I doubt that the phrase separation of powers will be found in the NY Times, Washingoton Post, etc.
Anyone on the left who claims to be concerned about separation of power is actually just concerned about Republicans being in charge of anything.
got to give Bush’s people credit. They KNOW one thing: its all about W, all the time.
superdestroyer sneers about the “left” only being concerned about Republicans being in charge. Um, haven’t the last six years proven that concern to be totally justified?
JIm,
I would believe that the left would have much more credibility about worrying about good government if they every brought up the Democratic party corruption in places like DC, Mass. or even Chicago.
To believe that the party of Chicago machine politics is the party of “good government” is just water carrying for the Democrats.
Superdestroyer- Why do you keep bringing up DC? They can only vote in Presidential elections- and have no representation in Congress (they do have a non-voting representative). There are very few Republicans in DC, so there’s little need for stuffing the ballot boxes for president.
Anyway I see that you don’t mention Republican corruption in places like Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida.
kritter,
The last time I look the Republicans were voted out of office in Ohio and Penn but that the Corrupt Democrats were still in charge in NJ, Mass, Chicago, and DC. Have you looked at the mayor of Detroit?
Of course you did not address my question of why do not Democrats not care about corruption if it is a Democrat nor will they vote them out of office.
When the Democrats win control of all parts of the government in 2009, will we see a return to the ethics and the lack of oversight of the likes of Dan Rostenkowski(sp?). I doubt that the Democrats will care at all about “oversight” when they have total control.
I would love for you to present a case of where the Democrats have maintained good oversight when they have total control. Please name the state. Of is the demand for oversight just another political soundbite?
The misplaced A, B, C’s of “DESIGNED TO HARM”. 4/18/07
SUMMARY.
In 2007 duplicated is the U.S. Senate’s stated Department of Defense (DOD) misplaced “experiments that were designed to harm” records? [6] This is by the in 2006 established CIVILIAN Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA). [8] Under its “NATIONAL SECURITY MISSIONS” is the advancement of the DOD Project 112, SHAD “Biomedical” lessons learned. [7] BARDA, under the present war cover, also lacks the oversight and accountability of the past wars DOD Shipboard Hazard and Defense (SHAD) experiment. That it “”WAS NECESSARY “TO CONCEAL THESE ACTIVITIES FROM THE AMERICAN PUBLIC IN GENERAL,” BECAUSE PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE OF THE “UNETHICAL AND ILLICIT ACTIVITIES WOULD HAVE SERIOUS REPERCUSSIONS IN POLITICAL AND DIPLOMATIC CIRCLES AND WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE ACCOMPLISHMENT OF ITS MISSION.”" says it all!! See Footnote 4, U.S. Supreme Court STANLEY military experiments case, Page 688. [3]
A. Each “designed to harm” project completes the Research and Development (R&D) process. Prior R&D is reviewed, e.g., Project SHAD. The resulting Scope of Work defines what each experiment is “designed” to accomplish. The how, where, when and who is identified.
B. The conducted RESEARCH cause and effects are closely followed and also recorded.
C. From the results are DEVELOPED safe production, in-the-field use, treatment and protection.
AT THE TIME, AND LONG AFTER THESE PROJECTS ARE OUT-OF-DATE, THIS EXPERIMENT REVEALING CAUSE AND EFFECTS ARE NOT IN A SUBJECT’S MEDICAL HISTORY. Their resulting disabilities are not in the Dept. of Veterans Affairs (VA) “schedule of ratings for disabilities”. [5] This Veterans Court Chief Judge’s “may not review” [5] cause and effects are not available for past, present and future veteran diagnosis and treatment: 1. By civilian HMO and VA Physicians’! 2. For each group’s long term “to harm” follow up, that would alert the victims. This is the U.S. Senate Report’s from 1944, 63 YEARS of lost, individual and group benefiting lessons learned! Thereby, lost is treatment for the original and additional injuries. And 3. For use as evidence during U.S. Executive (DOD & VA) and Judicial Branch processes! The subjects’ never the wiser become, e.g., Congress’s recent “Veterans Right to Know Act” failures.
CHRONOLOGY.
H.R. 4259 [109th]: Veterans Right to Know Act to establish the Veterans’ Right to Know Commission bill was proposed in the 2005 & 2006 Congresses. At the end of each session all proposed bills that haven’t passed are cleared from the books. This bill never became law.
The from 1944 DOD “designed to harm” are documented as conducted on “hundreds of thousands” by the 1994 U.S. SENATE REPORT! [6] The REPORT’s NOTES (No.’s 72, 168 & 169) cite, “The Nazi Doctors and the Nuremberg Code, Human Rights in Human Experimentation.” Not addressed by the U.S. Congress and U.S. Courts are the many conducted in direct disobedience of the DOD Secretary’s 1953 ‘Nuremberg’ order; “The Nazi Doctors” pages 343-345. [2] With the Secretary’s of all U.S. Military Services and the DOD R&D Board then known! This ignored order was TOP SECRET until 1975, 22 YEARS LATER. The subjects by its “need to know” are prevented from finding out. The 1994 Report noted that rights be restored. To-date, in 2007, not done!
“The court may not review the schedule of ratings for disabilities or the policies underlying the schedule.”, i.e., the needed for treatment “designed to harm” causes and effects! [6] The Veterans Court Chief Judge’s statement during 17-18 Oct. 1994. [5] His severely “may not review” restricted is a Congress’s 12/18/88 established Legislative ‘no teeth’ Article I Court. [9] Their oversight and accountability response to the 6/25/87 STANLEY experiment. One of the U.S. Judicial Branch Supreme Court decisions on: 1. The DOD STANLEY 1953 order disobeyed 1958 confirming Congress is responsible Case. [3] And 2. The 1950 FERES Case that prevents recourse on DOD “harm” as “incident” to service. [1] Made very clear is that UNLESS CONGRESS CHANGES IT, BY REASON OF MILITARY SERVICE VETERANS’ LOST ARE PRIOR TO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS! They are given to convicted rapists and murderers. [4] These cases assume that the DOD and VA “disabilities” coverage provides remedy. Not addressed is the withheld R&D “experiments…designed to harm” identifying, needed for treatment evidence! Congress’s 12 December 1974 Privacy Act censored the names of all injury witnesses from surviving and future service records. The 12 July 1973 National Personnel Records Center fire destroyed “to harm” service records.
Will BARDA’s needed for treatment “NATIONAL SECURITY” evidence be part of YOUR Medical History?
A politically contrived justice denied for the greater good, end justifies the deliberate “to harm” means. Make the checks and balances within and between our branches of government work! Only when you hold your members in the U.S. Congress responsible will this happen!
REFERENCES:
[1] Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135, 146 (1950)
[2] DOD Secretary’s 26 February 1953 NO non-consensual, human experiment’s Memo pages 343-345. George J. Annas and Michael A. Grodin, “The Nazi Doctors and the Nuremberg Code; Human Rights in Human Experimentation” (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992). In REFERENCE [6] as NOTES 72, 168 & 169.
[3] U.S. SUPREME COURT, JUNE 25, 1987, U.S. V. STANLEY, 107 S. CT. 3054 (VOLUME 483 U.S., SECTION 669, PAGES 699 TO 710). In REFERENCE [6] cited in NOTE 169.
[4] U.S. State Dept., “U.S. Report under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights July 1994, Article 7″.
[5] Chief Judge and colleague statements, Court of Veterans Appeals, Annual Judicial Conference, Fort Meyer, VA., 17 & 18 October 1994. http://www.goodnet. com/~heads/ nebeker.html
[6] December 8, 1994 REPORT 103-97 “Is Military Research Hazardous to Veterans’ Health? Lessons Spanning Half a Century.” Hearings Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, 103rd Congress 2nd Session. With NOTES 1 to 170.
[7] “Project 112 (Including Project SHAD) Home”; www1.va.gov/ shad/ Starting in 1962 DOD chemical and biological experiments.
[8] Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA). Became law 19 December 2006.
[9] Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 38, Part V, Para. 7252. Jurisdiction; finality of decisions.