My First Amendment

[Scott Brown]

Today, I gave my first speech on the Senate floor. I feel that it's time to return tax dollars back in to the pockets of American workers and provide across the board tax relief for working families.

These tax cuts have had bipartisan support in the past, and I believe that individual citizens know better on how to spend their own money. For almost 130 million American workers will benefit from these tax cuts.

[lindsey vonn]

Trials and Error

Congressional Republicans often say that the United States should use every legal means to combat terrorism — and they are right, which makes it deeply puzzling that they want to deprive the government of the single most effective way of bringing terrorists to justice.

Congressional Republicans are trying to block the use of federal money to hold civilian criminal trials of 9/11 suspects. Spearheading this affront to justice — a damaging meddling in another branch of government — is Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican of South Carolina. Mr. Graham has introduced legislation to force the administration to use military commissions exclusively to try terrorism defendants. A similar bill is in the House.

In November, an effort to attach the Senate version to an appropriations bill lost by a 54-to-45 vote. The measure was supported by Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut and four Democrats: Jim Webb of Virginia, Arkansas’ Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor, and Maria Cantwell of Washington.

Since then, there has been no Democratic stampede to sign on to the scheme. But with Mr. Graham planning another go at it, no one can be entirely confident about the outcome — least of all the White House.

The stakes for President Obama start with the need to bring the mass murderers of Sept. 11, 2001, to justice in credible proceedings in American courts. Unlike the military tribunals, courts have a proven ability to try high-profile terrorism cases with competence and fairness. More than 300 people have been convicted on terrorism-related charges in federal courts since Sept. 11. Military tribunals have convicted three, two of whom were later released.

If Mr. Obama does not stop Mr. Graham’s assault on the courts and prosecutorial discretion, his ability to make national security policy will be compromised.

In a joint letter last week to House leaders, Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. and Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned Congress that putting restrictions on terrorism prosecutions would set an unwise precedent. “In order to protect the American people as effectively as possible,” they wrote, “we must be in a position to use every lawful instrument of national power — including both courts and military commissions.”

The Obama administration was right to have the F.B.I. arrest and interrogate the failed Christmas Day bomber and file federal terrorism charges against him, rather than throw him in a military prison and afford him no rights. While it can be hard to differentiate between criminal and military terrorism cases, this one was easy. The suspect was arrested on United States soil and arrested for plotting to attack a civilian target.

The Justice Department also was right to plan to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other suspected organizers of the 9/11 attacks in the federal courthouse in Lower Manhattan. Caving in so quickly to parochial worries and political pressure was foolish. It would be disastrous if the administration were to now give in to this effort to abandon terrorism trials in federal courts and retreat to the tribunals, which may never be able to produce a conviction that Americans can be proud of.

[CJ]

Well I was surprised to see that Kerry voted with you Scott. Does that mean he was spooked by the vote in January? Or was this a one time favor? Everything you said made total sense...to the taxpayers.

[1789 Patriot]

Read my post "Know your enemies" Senator Brown. The only compromise these democrats=progressives=marxists know is to do it their way. That is what they think of compromise.

[Grandpa]

So much for bi-partisanship!! Looks like you were used for the jobs bill Scott. Only 4 democrats supported your ammendment? Bi-partisanship huh? Yeah, right... Good luck with that.

[Ron Cantu]

Wow. Almost across party lines they voted. Something that would truly help us taxpayers with money that was supposed to help us taxpayers and only four democrats voted for yes. Amazing... Thanks for the effort Senator Brown. Too bad Democrats really don't care. Do you think Obama has them locked down or do they not care?

[CJ]

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2010-40 So does this mean it didn't pass? Interesting how they voted.

[CJ]

Way to go! Music to our ears. But just curious, what is the bill that is being amended? Would hate to see such a sensible piece of legislation waterski in behind more of this junky stuff. Which 130 million workers would get tax relief? How would this be applied?

[1789 Patriot]

Nice job Scott! I like the fact that you seem to understand it is the taxpayer's money and not the governments. Work on getting your colleagues to understand that and reduce the size of this bloated government. Thanks!

[Grandpa]

Scott, thank you for the first sensible jobs bill ammendment. Great job. Thank you for doing the "peoples" business. I hope that your efforts are successful.