[GPSCC-chat] Fw: Message From Rep. Anna G. Eshoo

Mon Dec 19 22:52:50 PST 2011

I forgot Lofgren.  When Kucinich had his one-day impeachment hearing at the 
Judiciary Committee, Lofgren didn't even make a pretty speech.  That makes 
her easy to forget.  

She voted no with the others.

B

Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 22:49:05 -0800
From: pagesincolor at yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] Fw: Message From Rep. Anna G. Eshoo
To: snug.bug at hotmail.com; carolineyacoub at att.net; sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org

Does this mean that Zoe Lofgren voted against NDAA 2012?  She also has a proposal for an alternative to SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) detailed on her web site that I have yet to read.

Thanks for posting this Caroline.

John Thielking

From: Brian Good <snug.bug at hotmail.com>
To: carolineyacoub at att.net; sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org 
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 10:43 PM
Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] Fw: Message From Rep. Anna G. Eshoo

Eshoo, Farr, Honda, Stark, Lee, Miller, Woolsey and Speier all voted against it.Nancy Pelosi was the only Bay Area Congresscritter to vote for it.http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll932.xml

Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 21:10:17 -0800From: carolineyacoub at att.netTo: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.orgSubject: [GPSCC-chat] Fw: Message From Rep. Anna G. Eshoo

I wrote to Anna Eshoo thanking her for her no vote on the defense authorization bill. This was her reply. I thought you might be interested.
Caroline

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: "ca14ima.pub at mail.house.gov" <ca14ima.pub at mail.house.gov>
To: carolineyacoub at att.net
Sent: Mon, December 19, 2011 3:06:48 PM
Subject: Message From Rep. Anna G. Eshoo

December 19, 2011 

Dear  Mrs. Yacoub , 

Thank you for contacting me about the National Defense Authorization Act, legislation which sets defense policy and spending levels for the coming year. On May 26 th I voted against the Ho use version of this legislation.   O n December 14 th I voted against the  House-Senate Conference Report,  but   it passed the House by a vote of 283-136. 

The Fiscal Year 2012 Defense Authorization  authorizes $670 billion  for defense activities, inclu ding personnel expenses, health care, weapons systems, and base construction.  I could not support the measure for several reasons. 

In the most general sense, despite severe cutbacks throughout the government and the lowest revenue levels in years, this legislation sets a defense spending level that is twice as high as the rest of the world, combined. Although the overall level is a reduction from last year, the reduction is primarily related  to our planned drawdown in Iraq. Congress has failed to make serious, fundamental changes to defense spending. In order to be serious about fiscal responsibility— and I believe we must be—Congress  has to take a much harder  look at
 the defense budget than this legislation reflects. 

The Defense Authorization also include s several provisions that I  oppose and consider a threat to our national security and civil liberties. Similar to past pieces of legislation, the bill effectively blocks the closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention facility in Cuba.  As  I' ve  stated for many years, the continuing use of this facility is strategically counterproductive and offensive to our most closely-held American values. Insisting on its continuing use and
 prohibiting the transfer of its inmates to regular prisons , as this legislation does, is a step in exactly the wrong direction. 

The Defense Authorization also contains unacceptable provisions related to the treatment of detainees. Ignoring the views of the President, the Secretary of Defense, the Director of the CIA, and the Director of the FBI, the Defense Authorization includes mandatory military detention for  many  terrorism suspects, including  noncitizens captured within the U.S. The law permits indefinite detention, circumventing suspects' habeas corpus rights. This policy will thwart the efforts of our civilian law enforcement officers whose efforts have protected our country from terrorism since 9/11
 and raise serious Constitutional issues.  Although President Obama has indicated he will no longer veto the bill, h uman rights groups, law enforcement , and the defense community are united in their opposition to this policy, and I  could not support it. 

I will conti nue to be an active participant in the discussions concerning how best to protect our country, our civil rights, and our fiscal responsibility, and I appreciate your input into this critical conversation. 
If you have any other questions or comments, let me hear from you.  I value what my constituents say to me, and always need your thoughts and benefit from your ideas.

I've created an ongoing e-newsletter to keep constituents informed on a variety of congressional issues and legislation.  Many constituents tell me how much they value reading it, and if you would like to as well, you can go to my website at http://eshoo.house.gov and click on Sign Up for ENews.  Your email address will never be used by anyone except my office to communicate with you, and your tax dollars will be conserved by using electronic communications rather than traditional mailings. 
Sincerely,

Anna G. Eshoo
Member of Congress

  _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss_______________________________________________sosfbay-discuss mailing listsosfbay-discuss at cagreens.orghttp://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cagreens.org/pipermail/sosfbay-discuss_lists.cagreens.org/attachments/20111219/aae13aae/attachment.html>