Zoomie
02-26-2010, 08:59 AM
By Susan Crabtree - 02/25/10 08:00 PM A controversial bill that would have levied criminal punishments on intelligence officers for harsh interrogations was pulled Thursday evening.
House Republicans charged Democrats with trying to sneak a provision into the intelligence authorization bill that would establish criminal punishment for CIA agents and other intelligence officials who engage in “cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment” during interrogations.
Democrats inserted an 11-page addition into the bill late Wednesday night as the House Rules Committee considered the legislation. The provision, previously not vetted in committee, applied to “any officer or employee of the intelligence community” who during interrogations engages in beatings, infliction of pain or forced ****** acts. The bill said the acts covered by the provision would include inducing hypothermia, conducting mock executions or “depriving the [detainee] of necessary food, water, sleep, or medical care.”
The language gave Congress the discretion to determine what the terms mean, and it would have imposed punishments of up to 15 years in prison, and in some cases, life sentences if a detainee died as a result of the interrogation.
Republicans criticized the language and the way it was introduced.
“This will fundamentally change the nature of the intelligence community by creating a criminal statute governing interrogations,” said Rep. Pete Hoesktra (R-Mich.).
He added that it had appeared “out of nowhere” in a manager’s amendment.
“Would someone on the other side please explain the rationale behind this and why the majority was unwilling to have hearings on this issue?" he said.
On Thursday night, Hoekstra lauded the GOP effort against the bill.
"Republicans brought this to the attention of the American people, who were rightly outraged that Democrats would try to target those we ask to serve in harm’s way and with a unified push we were successful in getting them to pull the bill," Hoekstra said in a statement. "The annual intelligence bill should be about protecting and defending our nation, not targeting those we ask to do that deed and giving greater protections to terrorists."
Intelligence committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-Texas) added the language, originally offered by Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.), to his manager’s amendment, which makes several changes to the bill passed by committee.
Reyes and other Democrats argued that the language simple underscores existing anti-torture laws.
“I’m hearing from Republicans that we are somehow sacrificing our national security” through this bill, said Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.). She said the language underscores existing law and enhances national security.
Because Reyes included it in his manager's amendment, Republicans were not able to try to strike it from the bill before passage. The only recourse they had was to try to excise it during the House-Senate conference. The Senate version does not contain similar language.
Read the rest here (http://thehill.com/homenews/house/83817-gop-cries-foul-over-amendment-to-intel-bill)I'm glad that Hoesktra at least was paying attention to what was going on.
House Republicans charged Democrats with trying to sneak a provision into the intelligence authorization bill that would establish criminal punishment for CIA agents and other intelligence officials who engage in “cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment” during interrogations.
Democrats inserted an 11-page addition into the bill late Wednesday night as the House Rules Committee considered the legislation. The provision, previously not vetted in committee, applied to “any officer or employee of the intelligence community” who during interrogations engages in beatings, infliction of pain or forced ****** acts. The bill said the acts covered by the provision would include inducing hypothermia, conducting mock executions or “depriving the [detainee] of necessary food, water, sleep, or medical care.”
The language gave Congress the discretion to determine what the terms mean, and it would have imposed punishments of up to 15 years in prison, and in some cases, life sentences if a detainee died as a result of the interrogation.
Republicans criticized the language and the way it was introduced.
“This will fundamentally change the nature of the intelligence community by creating a criminal statute governing interrogations,” said Rep. Pete Hoesktra (R-Mich.).
He added that it had appeared “out of nowhere” in a manager’s amendment.
“Would someone on the other side please explain the rationale behind this and why the majority was unwilling to have hearings on this issue?" he said.
On Thursday night, Hoekstra lauded the GOP effort against the bill.
"Republicans brought this to the attention of the American people, who were rightly outraged that Democrats would try to target those we ask to serve in harm’s way and with a unified push we were successful in getting them to pull the bill," Hoekstra said in a statement. "The annual intelligence bill should be about protecting and defending our nation, not targeting those we ask to do that deed and giving greater protections to terrorists."
Intelligence committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-Texas) added the language, originally offered by Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.), to his manager’s amendment, which makes several changes to the bill passed by committee.
Reyes and other Democrats argued that the language simple underscores existing anti-torture laws.
“I’m hearing from Republicans that we are somehow sacrificing our national security” through this bill, said Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.). She said the language underscores existing law and enhances national security.
Because Reyes included it in his manager's amendment, Republicans were not able to try to strike it from the bill before passage. The only recourse they had was to try to excise it during the House-Senate conference. The Senate version does not contain similar language.
Read the rest here (http://thehill.com/homenews/house/83817-gop-cries-foul-over-amendment-to-intel-bill)I'm glad that Hoesktra at least was paying attention to what was going on.