Advertisement

Archive for Wednesday, April 25, 2012

House committee looks at measure that advocates individual rights

April 25, 2012

Advertisement

TOPEKA — A Kansas House of Representative committee discussed a resolution Wednesday that proponents said advocates for individual rights threatened by the federal government.

The Veterans, Military and Homeland Security committee held a hearing on HR 6021, which opposes the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act signed by President Barack Obama.

According to the resolution, the NDAA allows the “arrest, detention and rendition of American citizens without trial.”

Even if passed, the resolution would have no effect on the federal law.

“It’s just a statement,” said Rep. Mario Goico, R-Wichita. “It doesn’t change anything other than make a statement on what the position of the House is.”

Still, the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Charlotte O’Hara, R-Overland Park, said it was an important first step in opposing the bill.

“A whisper is better than nothing,” she said.

The NDAA is enacted each year to appropriate military funding and authorize military activities. Obama signed this year’s 565-page bill on Dec. 31, 2011.

Goico said the NDAA extended the powers given to President Bush in 2001 to the Obama Administration. O’Hara said she introduced the resolution because it is time “get back what the state’s and individual’s rights are in this country.”

“As our federal government continually encroaches, we absolutely have to say no more,” she said. “Obamacare is an excellent example.”

Along with providing $662 billion in defense funding for the fiscal year, the bill contained two controversial provisions. According to a 25-page memo drafted by the Kansas Legislative Research Department, one provision, Section 1021, affirms the authority given to the president in 2001 to detain persons implicated in the 9/11 attacks or who is “a part of or substantially supported al-Qaida, the Taliban or associated forces.” Section 1022 of the bill allows the military detention of any person covered by Section 1021 or who “participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.”

According to the same memo, critics argue that the provisions do not extend protection for United States citizens or lawful residents. They also argue the executive branch will determine which people meet the criteria and that terms in the bill are undefined.

However, the memo cited several sources, including the American Civil Liberties Union, that stated the NDAA does not grant any new powers to detain U.S. citizens. The ACLU does advocate ending the 2001 authorization extended in Section 1021 when combat operations end in Afghanistan.

Obama has stated his administration will interpret the bill in accordance to “the constitution, laws of war and other applicable laws,” according to the memo.

Because of the high number of people wishing to speak, testimony was limited to five minutes. The hearing is expected to continue into today’s committee meeting.

Comments

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 2 years, 4 months ago

Many if not most of these powers should be rescinded. However, I have a feeling that if a Republican is elected in November, these legislators will fall strangely silent on this matter.

0

Hooligan_016 2 years, 4 months ago

Kind of what I was thinking too. Why are they just now bringing this up as an issue ... ? I love the stretch of logic going from the NDAA to "Obamacare." Give me a break.

0

Hooligan_016 2 years, 4 months ago

Kind of what I was thinking too. Why are they just now bringing this up as an issue ... ? I love the stretch of logic going from the NDAA to "Obamacare." Give me a break.

0

William Weissbeck 2 years, 4 months ago

I agree with just_. This is where libertarians are utterly clueless about the effect of their support for the GOP. You can't have your cake and eat it too. You want smaller, less intrusive government, but you can't then support neo-cons and corportists who see the federal government as a "tool" to promote their global Roman Empire and through false fears to solidify their power. At least Democrats see government as a benevolent tool. If the Kansas reps. are so concerned, then pass a resolution denouncing GItmo and the Patriot Act. These all go hand-in-hand. We as a nation allowed our real and preached to fears to cause a cancer to metastasize.

0

JackMcKee 2 years, 4 months ago

The Kansas House advocating for individual liberties. Now I've had my good laugh for this morning.

0

Bnewfield 2 years, 4 months ago

Nice to see some states taking the lead against this act of tyranny. Hopefully, if all 50 follow suit and unite against NDAA, this junk legislation will be struck down forever! If you don't think NDAA is a threat, you need to take a look at http://www.martiallawusa.com/wp/?p=26. It's probably the biggest threat to personal liberty since 100,000 Japanese-Americans were locked up because of their race.

0

William Weissbeck 2 years, 4 months ago

You've already been co-opted and don't even know it.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.