Topic: John Conyers

Suddenly, impeachment hearings are looking like a strong possibility

November 8, 2007 |

Kucinich, by bringing his Cheney impeachment resolution to a floor vote in the House, has shaken up the politics of impeachment, and looks like it may end up putting Cheney in the dock.

You wouldn’t know it if you just watch TV news or read the corporate press, but this past Tuesday, something remarkable happened. Despite the pig-headed opposition of the Democratic Party’s top congressional leadership, a majority of the House, including three Republicans, voted to send Dennis Kucinich’s long sidelined Cheney impeachment bill (H Res 333) to the Judiciary Committee for hearings.

The vote was 218 to 194.

Now the behind-the-scenes partisan maneuvering that preceded that vote was arcane indeed, with Kucinich first exercising a member’s privilege motion to present his stymied impeachment bill to the full House, only to have Speaker Nancy Pelosi arrange for a colleague (Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-MD) offer a motion to table it. The Republicans, anxious to embarrass the Speaker, threw a wrench into that plan, though, by voting as a bloc to oppose tabling. Since Kucinich already has 22 co-sponsors for his bill, it was clear that the tabling gambit would fail. As soon as that became apparent, rank-and-file Democrats, unwilling to be seen by their constituents as defending Cheney, rushed to change their votes to opposing the tabling motion. In the end, tabling failed by 242 to 170 with 77 Democrats supporting a pleasantly surprised Kucinich. «Read the rest of this article»

Sections: Opinion, Politics | 1 Comment »

Breaking down myths of the Matthew Shepard bill

By David W. Shelton | August 19, 2007 |

The Matthew Shepard bill, also known as H.R. 1592, the “Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007″ and S. 1105, “A Bill to Provide Federal Assistance to States, local jurisdictions, and Indian tribes to prosecute hate crimes, and for other purposes” has been the topic of much debate in among pundits and pastors over the last year.

One of the most die-hard myths surrounding these much-needed bills is the absurd notion that they would jeopardize the free speech and religious expressions of pastors who wish to preach (and often do preach) that homosexuality is sin.

Of all of the hate-crime bills (that include sexual orientation and gender identity language) that has come down the pike in recent years, this is the first that was endorsed by the American Civil Liberties Union. That’s an immediate red flag to many conservatives, but it shouldn’t be. The ACLU endorsed this bill precisely because it would not interfere with guaranteed first amendment rights, specifically free speech and freedom of religion.

A colleague and fellow activist pointed out to me that there was a member of the House Judiciary Subcommittee that the bill could infringe on free speech. When asked about his source, he then provided a link to the transcript of the meeting in question which included that quote. After searching through all 319 pages of the transcript, I came to understand the bill even more. «Read the rest of this article»

Sections: Issues, Politics | 2 Comments