/2011/12/22/boxers-response-to-ndaa/

{"item":{"status":"visible","url":"\/2011\/12\/22\/boxers-response-to-ndaa\/","trash":"","name":"boxers-response-to-ndaa","parent":"","title":"Boxer's Response to Letter Regarding NDAA (HR 1540)","date":"2011-12-22 17:19:06","filepath":"posts\/2000977_boxers-response-to-ndaa.xml.json","type":"post","content":"<img class=\"alignleft size-full wp-image-802\" style=\"margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;\" title=\"congress\" src=\"http:\/\/www.8bitrobot.com\/media\/uploads\/2011\/11\/congress.png\" alt=\"congress\" width=\"127\" height=\"68\" \/>Today I received a letter in response to <a href=\"http:\/\/www.8bitrobot.com\/2011\/12\/21\/letter-to-congress-ndaa-hr-1540\/\">a message I sent Senator Boxer<\/a> regarding NDAA (<a href=\"http:\/\/www.votesmart.org\/bill\/14203\/37467\/national-defense-authorization-act-for-fiscal-year-2012\">HR 1540<\/a>). \u00a0The response was extremely quick and deflates my \"<a href=\"http:\/\/www.8bitrobot.com\/2011\/12\/21\/letter-to-congress-ndaa-hr-1540\/\">It\u2019s like talking to a wall<\/a>\" statement a little.\n\nIn her letter, which is posted below, Sen. Boxer explains how the bill was passed and describes the multiple attempts to amend it by Sen. Udall and Sen. Feinstein to protect our civil rights. \u00a0Although she voted for HR 1540, she explains how she was against it.\n\nIn addition, Senator Boxer is working to produce (co-author) a bill titled the\u00a0Due Process Guarantee Act (<a href=\"http:\/\/www.opencongress.org\/bill\/110-s2003\/show\">S.2003<\/a>), which \"protects American citizens arrested within the United States from being held indefinitely by the U.S. military.\" <\/em>\n\n <\/em>S.2003 is nice and all, but will it keep Americans from going on vacation overseas? \u00a0Our cage gets smaller and smaller, doesn't it?\n\nTo be fair, I should withhold my response until after the reader has had a chance to read her response, which is well-intentioned and comforting. \u00a0Boxer and her aids have my respect for the quick response and attention.\nDear [REDACTED]:<\/p>\nThank you for writing to me about provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) concerning the military detention of enemy combatants. \u00a0I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.<\/p>\nI was deeply disappointed that the final version of the NDAA did not include important language authored by Senators Mark Udall (D-CO) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) \u00a0regarding detainees that would have protected civil liberties while helping to keep us safe. \u00a0During floor consideration of the NDAA, I voted for an amendment offered by <a href=\"http:\/\/www.govtrack.us\/congress\/vote.xpd?vote=s2011-210&sort=district\">Senator Udall<\/a> that would have replaced the detainee provisions in the bill with a requirement for the Administration to report to Congress on detention authorities. \u00a0Unfortunately, this amendment failed by a vote of 38-60.<\/p>\nI also voted for an amendment offered by <a href=\"http:\/\/www.govtrack.us\/congress\/vote.xpd?vote=s2011-213\">Senator Feinstein<\/a> that would have clarified that mandatory military detention would apply only to terrorist suspects captured outside the United States. \u00a0This amendment also failed by a vote of 45-55.<\/p>\nI have now agreed to be a co-sponsor of <a href=\"http:\/\/www.opencongress.org\/bill\/110-s2003\/show\">S.2003<\/a>, the Due Process Guarantee Act. \u00a0This important bipartisan legislation would protect American citizens arrested within the United States from being held indefinitely by the U.S. military.<\/p>\nI strongly oppose any expansion of military detention authority that erodes our civil liberties. \u00a0However, I voted for the National Defense Authorization Act because it includes a number of provisions for our troops and their families, including a pay raise requested by President Obama and important health care benefits.<\/p>\nAgain, thank you for writing. \u00a0Please feel free to contact me again about this or other issues of concern to you.<\/p>\nSincerely,<\/p>\nBarbara Boxer\nUnited States Senator<\/p>\nI really do appreciate Senator Boxer's attempt at correcting this assault on our civil liberties, yet I am still\u00a0disappointed\u00a0she approved it by voting Yes<\/strong>.\n\nIt is obvious our military needs services and pay. \u00a0However, by allowing these provisions to pass in the Senate and the House, she effectively undermines everything they have fought and continue to fight for. \u00a0It is the same as offering\u00a0a soldier gold to take down the banner they revere and carry into battle. \u00a0In a way HR 1540 is an indirect form of dirty money.\n\nBoxer may be on track for correcting the issue, but it is unconciousable to vote Yes on something so wrong and unconstitutional with only the hope of correcting it later. \u00a0As everyone knows, once one gives up even a little bit of liberty, it is near impossible to get it back.\n\nSenators in minority have a duty to stand ground by refusing any bill that degrades our individual civil rights. \u00a0In this case the troops will have to wait on some services and opponents can lambast the minority with emotional arguments about not helping soldiers. \u00a0But, at least a\u00a0dissenting\u00a0Senator can hold those nasty parts of the bill high and point the blame right back.\n\nIn short, this is the difference between a Statesman and a Senator. \u00a0Who will protect what makes America America if our leaders won't?\n\nWho got us into this mess? \u00a0Ask\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.votesmart.org\/candidate\/26755\/howard-mckeon\">Howard P. 'Buck' McKeon (CA - R)<\/a> and\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.votesmart.org\/candidate\/845\/adam-smith\">Adam Smith (WA - D)<\/a>.\n\nread the <a href=\"http:\/\/www.8bitrobot.com\/2011\/12\/21\/letter-to-congress-ndaa-hr-1540\/\">original message<\/a> to Senator Boxer, Senator Feinstein, and Rep. Pelosi.<\/em>\n\n "}}

/2011/12/22/boxers-response-to-ndaa/

Lorem Ipsum

Lorem