OpenCongress Blog

Blog Feed Comments Feed More RSS Feeds

Congress Links

July 27, 2010 - by Moshe Bildner

Yesterday, Congress reacted to WikiLeaks’ release of classified documents, Democrats made a push to break the Republican filibuster of the DISCLOSE Act, and the heat has gone up on illegal immigration, even as the numbers of immigrants has fallen.

  • Members of Congress played down the significance of WikiLeaks’ highly publicized release of classified Pentagon documents.  Sen. John Kerry [D-MA] condemned the leak as “unacceptable”, but cautioned “it’s important not to over-hype, or get excessively excited” about them. Sen. John McCain dismissed the leaked information as “little more than what we knew already” and Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) insisted that the documents are outdated and do not reflect President Obama’s leadership in Afghanistan. (Wall Street Journal)
  • Congressional Democrats are worried that they may not be able to overcome the Republican filibuster of the DISCLOSE Act. President Obama meanwhile attacked Republican opponents of the DISCLOSE Act, accusing them of voting “to allow corporate and special-interest takeovers of our elections.” (The New York Times)
  • Advocates of “cap-and-trade” to mitigate catatstrophic climate change worry that environmental legislation will be more difficult to pass in the near future, as Republicans are poised to pick up seats in the House and Senate this November. (NY Times)
  • The seven Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee have written to its chairman seeking a hearing on alleged politicization of the Civil Rights Division. (Politico)
  • The LA Times notes that the rhetoric surrounding illegal immigration continues to heat up, despite the fact that illegal immigration has actually been falling for several years. (LA Times)
  • As midterm elections approach, Democrats are worried about ethics investigations into Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) (Politico). Susan Crabtree of The Hill explains how an ethics trial for Rangel would work.

Congress Links compiled by OC Research Associates Moshe Bildner, Jason Rhee, and Hilary Worden. Questions & comments welcome: writeus at opencongress d0t org yo. You know how we do. Photo via our terrific partners Daylife. Man oh man do they ever know their news. So much info out there, gets wild, you know?

Like this post? Stay in touch by following us on Twitter, joining us on Facebook, or by Subscribing with RSS.
 

Comments

  • Chris51 07/28/2010 7:04am

    The Republicans filibuster again (Definition of Filibuster: the use of extreme dilatory tactics in an attempt to delay or prevent action especially in a legislative assembly.) SURPRISE, SURPRISE, SURPRISE, not.

    The GOP/Repubs. know that the DISCLOSURE ACT would make them TRANSPARENT. It is easier for politicians to run sensationalized campaign Ads, and twist the truth. The top 1- 3% wealthy individuals, Special Interest Groups, and corrupt politicians know very well that by providing some of this information on their Ads, busy Americans might see through the deceit and who will benefit most $$$$ from the message of the Ad. The Republicans filibuster this out of fear that they would lose the millions they make from contributions, and expose Corporations.
    The public/VOTERS need to write, email, and call their representatives and ask that their voice be heard on this issue. We need to know up front were the money is coming from, so we will be less deceived and kept in the dark.

  • rhian116 07/31/2010 12:17am

    I’m not a conspiracy theorist by any means, but it seems a little suspicious that Rangel is now facing ethics charges just a couple weeks after his bill to help unemployed that Repubs fought tooth and nail over passed. Seems like it’s a little bit of payback from the Repubs to me. And speaking of ethics charges, if he’s being charged for accepting gifts over $50, why aren’t the rest of the scum in Washington being charged for the same thing? How many can honestly say they weren’t given at least stock options, or promises of being CEO’s by companies if they helped out Big Business? And why are they even allowed to accept anything at all? Walmart associates aren’t allowed to accept even a stick of gum from anyone so there isn’t a conflict of interest. Why is Walmart more ethical about that than our own Congress? That’s pretty sad considering all of Walmart’s own ethics violations that they are still better than our Reps.

Due to the archiving of this blog, comment posting has been disabled.