Accountability

We've had an ongoing war or two, some hurricanes, and a lot of tax breaks, leading to a humonguous deficit. We as a people have yet to hear a convincing explanation for the war in Iraq, the mishaps over the federal response to Katrina, or a logical reason for the tax cuts. We certainly have no word on just how the gummint plans to tamp down on the deficit, except for soothing noises about the free market, trickle-down economics, and the like. No accountability from anyone-- zip.

Yet, Congress doesn't seem to understand that it controls the purse strings, not Smirk, Scowl, & Co. On Friday, there was a vote scheduled for yet another handout for war funds, without so much as a murmur about holding anyone responsible, or any plans regarding exit strategies, or really, anything at all. Considering that it is the supposedly more responsible Senate that is prepared to write a sizeable check, you know that the House will follow suit, and that will be that; another $50 billion down the drain. The cost of Iraq so far is over $2 billion, and running, with nearly 2,000 U.S. soldiers dead, officially close to 15,000 wounded, and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians dead. That's not counting the destruction to the Iraqi cities and infrastructure, which we are going to rebuild, rather than focusing on our own cities, towns, and infrastructure. But Congress has absolutely no questions-- none at all. Just approve a bill, and that's that.

I'd like to see some accountability on Congress' part to force some accountability on the administration's part. Rather than just handing over money, questions should be asked, some pre-conditions should be required, and some guidelines established for just how we're going to proceed. The one bright spot about this current fiscal capitulation is that the Senate has voted almost unanimously to restrict torture and follow appropriate standards for interrogation-- something they should have done a while back, after the scandal at Abu Ghraib broke wide open. But better late than never. What's shocking is that the administration is fighting this, and has actually threatened a veto over this issue. Smirk has issued no veto thus far in the nearly five years since he and his cohort overtook our gummint; there has been no restraint whatsoever in any way in any bills, spending or otherwise -- yet, now he's going to veto his very first bill, just because he won't be allowed to torture people?

Not only that, but nine U.S. Senators voted against McCain's amendment-- yes, you read that right. Nine so-called "statesmen" who think it's okay to torture people (all Republicans, naturally). Here's the roll call of shame, for your reference:

Wayne Allard (R-Colorado)
Kit Bond (R-Missouri)
Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma)
Thad Cochran (R-Mississippi)
John Cornyn (R-Texas)
James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma)
Pat Roberts (R-Kansas)
Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama)
Ted Stevens (R-Alaska)

I'm sure they'll all equivocate when asked, and come up with all sorts of reasons why they opposed the amendment, but in the end, it really comes down to whether or not they support the Geneva Conventions, the Army's own guidelines for interrogation procedures, common sense, and some level of humanity. These are all a conservative bunch, and most are from deep-red states or regions with high levels of evangelicals and extremists, so I don't know just how much trouble they'd be in with the voters, but they should be ashamed of themselves.

This isn't to say that passing the bill was all that wonderful; it's pretty sad that there even has to be a vote to state that torture is wrong. But at least it's a indication that there are limits to the atrocious behavior we've witnessed the last few years; maybe we'll get lucky and see some more instances of accountability, fiscal and otherwise.