Cross-posted at The Next Hurrah
It's not something I feel about Murray Abraham, Scott Fitzgerald, or even Lee Bailey. But when it comes to Sensenbrenner, I'm certain. F. James Sensenbrenner, Junior. And you, too, Dad. F. James Sensenbrenner, because he's already trying to F. you.
At the end of last week, liberal talk radio and the blogosphere exploded with outrage over the nearly unbelievable scene that unfolded live on C-SPAN, when House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner abruptly gaveled the minority-called hearing on the USA PATRIOT Act to a close and stormed out, ordering the witnesses dismissed, the microphones turned off, the record closed, and even had the official stenographer threatened for continuing to take notes on what the stunned Democrats he left behind were saying.
Or rather, liberal talk radio did. The blogosphere was still tearing its hair out over Howard Dean and those who would have him watch his mouth. And so we mostly missed the strange saga of F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr. and his "tactical nuclear option."
Many of you will recall that Sensenbrenner just last month was forced to correct House Report 109-51, in which
he ordered rewritten the descriptions of Democratic amendments that had been offered during the Committee markup of H.R. 748, the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act (CIANA). For those of you who don't remember, a sampling:
The author's description:
A Nadler amendment allows an adult who could be prosecuted under the bill to go to a Federal district court and seek a waiver to the state's parental notice laws if this remedy is not available in the state court. (no 11-16)
Which Sensenbrenner changed to read:
Mr. Nadler offered an amendment that would have created an additional layer of Federal court review that could be used by sexual predators to escape conviction under the bill. By a roll call vote of 11 yeas to 16 nays, the amendment was defeated.
Judiciary Committee Democrats, not surprisingly, demanded a retraction of the report and an apology from Sensenbrenner. The Chairman refused, and Democrats took to the floor in a series of "points of personal privilege," under which any Member may claim an hour of time when he or she feels she has been personally wronged and wishes to offer a defense or correction. Sensenbrenner eventually had to back down and correct the report.
Now we find ourselves, barely a month later, with Chairman Sensenbrenner once again out of control, flouting House rules, and robbing the minority of its right to be heard. The hearing he shut down was properly demanded under Rule XI, clause 2(j)(1) -- demanded because he had refused otherwise to permit Committee Democrats to call their own witnesses on the PATRIOT Act. Reminded that the Rules of the House entitle the minority to that right, he called the hearing for 8:30 am on Friday -- a day when the House was out of session and most other Members had returned home to their districts. So, with barely a half day's notice, witnesses were flown in from all across the country, Judiciary Committee Democrats rejiggered their schedules, and all were told by the Chairman that the hearing would be cancelled if anyone were late.
Running an extraordinarily tight ship, Sensenbrenner held close (after his own fashion) to the five minute rule. Normally, Members are given five minutes in which to pose questions to witnesses and receive their answers. Commonly, so long as they are mindful of time restrictions, witnesses are permitted to complete their answers even if they run over on time. But Sensenbrenner was having none of it that morning. Witnesses were gaveled down and cut off in mid-sentence, at five minutes on the dot. In one case, a Republican Member reportedly posed a five minute "question" to a witness, the representative of Amnesty International, which consisted of little more than a rant and berating of the witness and the organization he represented. At the end of the five minute tirade, time being up, Sensenbrenner moved on, refusing all requests that he be permitted to reply, until Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) was able to needle him into allowing a brief response.
In the end, though, Sensenbrenner had his way. In this video of the end of the hearing, available from Dembloggers.com, the Chairman is seen melting down, gaveling the hearing to a close unilaterally (as opposed to say, making a motion to adjourn in regular order), and storming out. In the minutes that followed, the video documents that Democrats soldiered on, though Committee staff turned off the microphones, and even allegedly attempted to insist that C-SPAN camera crews be removed. Perhaps even more informative were the interviews conducted by Air America Radio host Randi Rhodes with Judiciary Committee Democrats Sheila Jackson Lee, Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Jerry Nadler, audio of which is available here. In these interviews, the Members give us details not visible on the C-SPAN video. I recommend giving them a listen. And so, in his attempt to bury objections to the PATRIOT Act with an 8:30 hearing on a Friday, Sensenbrenner in fact created a sensation.
So what's next?
Well, Nancy Pelosi has already called for an apology, but Democrats shouldn't even consider stopping there.
Like any employee with an attitude problem, Jim Sensenbrenner has simply run out of chances. It was only a month ago that he was called out on his last ridiculous temper tantrum, and he got away with a warning. Now, though, it's time for probation. House Democrats must demand his formal censure, and stake out the position that another such abuse will result in demands for his removal as Judiciary Chairman.
Just as they did in calling attention to Sensenbrenner's last breach of decorum, Democrats should exercise their right to points of personal privilege on the House floor to make their demands, and Leader Pelosi should offer another question of the privileges of the House as a vehicle for moving for Sensenbrenner's formal censure.
This has gone on long enough. At a time when Congressional Republicans are already at a low ebb in terms of how the public views their mismangagement of power (see also: Terri Schiavo, the nuclear option, etc.), Sensenbrenner's continued misbehavior is an embarrassment now beyond a simple collegial intervention. |