History Professor and author Alfred McCoy, writing in Mother Jones, explains why the McCain Amendment won't ban torture. In fact, it may legitimize it.

Under pressure from the White House, the senators also loaded this legislation with loopholes that may soon allow coerced testimony -- extracted through torture -- into American courts for the first time in two centuries.

This disconcerting contrast is but one sign that, under the Bush administration, the United States is moving to publicly legitimate the use of torture, even to the point of twisting this congressional ban on inhumane interrogation in ways that could ultimately legalize such acts. And following their President's lead, the American people seem to be developing a tolerance, even a taste, for torture.

by TChris

George Bush isn't the only public official who thinks he has the right to decide which laws he must follow and which he is free to ignore. Congress passed a law prohibiting states from placing social security numbers on driver's licenses, but Mississippi refuses to change.

Mississippi's driver services director, Maj. Joseph Rigby, cited a state law allowing the practice. "I believe there's a separation of state and federal government," he said. "Right now, we still have a state law on the books that I have to abide by."

Rigby apparently sees no need to seek a court's opinion of congressional power to enact the law; he'd rather disregard it. Other states are more attentive to the federal prohibition, which serves the worthy purpose of making identity theft more difficult.

The good news is that Congress has loosened the rules on the eligibility of students with minor drug offenses for student aid. The bad news is its not enough.

"Someone who was caught using or dealing drugs long ago now will get financial aid," says Chris Mulligan of the Coalition for Higher Education Act Reform, whose members include civil rights, education, health and criminal justice groups. But "a student caught with a joint in college is still going to lose financial aid."

For more, check out Students for a Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP.) and their webpage on the law.

The House is preparing to extend the Patriot Act another five weeks.

Republicans are stalling. They have not done a thing to compromise since December. Since no one is gong to let the bill die a natural death, an extension is better than the Republicans jamming their version through.

We all better learn to think twice before clicking our mouses. A new law signed by President Bush last week makes sending annoying anonymous e-mails or posting annoying messages on websites a federal crime.

Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity.....Buried deep in the new law is Sec. 113, an innocuously titled bit called "Preventing Cyberstalking." It rewrites existing telephone harassment law to prohibit anyone from using the Internet "without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy."

For people who comment on use-net groups and blogs, this could be a problem. Here's the actual text:

"Whoever...utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet... without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person...who receives the communications...shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."

In 1998, then President Bill Clinton, who as I wrote yesterday, was no friend to the criminal defendant, signed legislation banning federal student aid to those who convicted of a non-violent drug offense, including possession of marijuana.

In the Ebeneezer Cheney budget bill approved by the Senate yesterday, there is one laudatory feature. NORML reports:

The US Senate voted 51 to 50 yesterday in favor of legislation that would lift the ban on federal aid to students who have a prior, non-violent drug conviction. The Congressional ban, known as the "drug offender exclusionary provision" of the Higher Education Act, has denied federal financial aid to some 175,000 students since its enactment in 1998.

Under the Senate provision, which was included in Senate Bill 1932 (the budget reconciliation bill), students with past drug convictions will now be eligible to apply for federal financial aid. However, students who are convicted of a nonviolent drug offense, including minor marijuana possession, while in college will continue to be stripped of their federal aid eligibility. President Bush is anticipated to approve the amendment, which would take effect in 2006.

After a day of haggling, filibustering Senators have agreed to extend the Patriot Act for six months while they continue to press for more protection of civil liberties. The bill has to be approved by the full Senate, the full House and then Bush. [Update: The Associated Press reports the full Senate has passed the extension bill.]

Sen. Russ Feingold says in a statement tonight (received by e-mail)

One thing is clear - what happened in the Senate over the past few weeks shows that this conference report is dead."

At least it also puts Souder's Sensenbrenner's meth bill restricting the sale of cold pills on hold. We can sneeze without fear.

VP Dick Cheney cast the tie-breaking vote to pass the stalled budget bill that reduces spending for social programs and hurts low income Americans. The bill slashes money for Medicaid, student loans, welfare and child support, while giving new tax breaks to the rich.

Emergency Campaign for America’s Priorities says Cheney kicked the crutches out from under Tiny Tim. At least, the Senate put in some changes that will require House approval, so the bill will be deferred until 2006. From the press release (received by e-mail):

The Senate has rejected Arctic drilling for oil and the bill passed by the House last week. A press release by the Alaska Wilderness League praises the Senate (received by e-mail):

"We congratulate all the members of the U.S. Senate who have stood up to Senator Stevens’ attempts at blackmail. It was a national disgrace that Senator Stevens was willing to hold funding for our troops hostage just to cut a deal for Big Oil. We congratulate the moderate members of Congress for voting the will of their constituents and fending off Stevens’ giveaway to the oil companies. We are proud to have preserved one of our last remaining wilderness areas for our children and future generations."

You had to know it was too good to be true. Don't praise John McCain's torture amendment too soon. The Levin-Graham Amendment passed along with it, and it amounts to a license to use coercive techniques, particularly on detainees at Guantanamo:

House and Senate negotiators agreed Friday to a measure that would enable the government to keep prisoners at Guantánamo Bay indefinitely on the basis of evidence obtained by coercive interrogations.

The provision, which has been a subject of extensive bargaining with the Bush administration, could allow evidence that would not be permitted in civilian courts to be admissable in deciding whether to hold detainees at the American military prison in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. In recent days, the Congressional negotiators quietly eliminated an explicit ban on the use of such material in an earlier version of the legislation.

Human Rights Watch explains:

The Senate has rejected the Patriot Act renewal legislation by a 52 to 47 vote. Frist said no to a three month extension.[Update: Roll Call vote is here.]

Huge defeat for Bush. But, they can still go back to the bargaining table and Frist might call for another vote before December 31 when the sunsetted provisions expire.

Cagey Frist: When he saw the bill was going down, he switched sides, so under the rules he can ask for another vote.

If your Senator voted against the Patriot Act, call them and thank them. Let them know you appreciate their vote for your freedom and privacy rights. And ask them to stand firm and reject a new compromise.

One of TalkLeft's most astute readers (and a major expert on all Department of Justice matters) suggests a connection between today's two news stories - the Times disclosures about secret wiretapping of domestic telephone calls, and the President's apparent yielding on the McCain amendment.

According to the Times, the Administration justifies its wiretapping under the President's inherent national security authority, even though there are specific statutes by Congress that prohibit it. The Wiretap Act specifically says that all wiretapping not authorized by statute is illegal, and that "procedures in [the Wiretap Act and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillanc Act] shall be the EXCLUSIVE MEANS by which electronic surveillance . . . and the interception of domestic wire, oral and electronic communications may be conducted."

If the President can ignore that statute and authorized wiretaps "to protect the nation," then equally he can ignore the McCain Amendment and order torture of detainees "to protect the nation."

Have we been sold a bill of goods?