A while ago, I started using GovTrack.us to watch actions on bills in the house and senate. I did so because I am interested to see how Ron Paul votes and how my Congressman, Jason Altmire, votes. I know that Arlen Specter and Bob Casey, Jr. generally are not going to vote as I would, but it’s nice to see if I’m right whenever there’s some senate action on GovTrack.
Today, when looking through the GovTrack feed, I found three recently-introduced House Resolutions that stuck out to me. I detail them and give my comments herein. I must remind the reader that I am a just little more than a beginner level interpreter of Congressional bills, so if I have incorrectly analyzed or have mistaken a meaning, please supply constructive criticism with links to references in a comment.
H.R. 6074 Gas Price Relief for Consumers Act of 2008. The Gas Price Relief for Consumers Act of 2008 was introduced by Wisconsin Democrat Steve Kagen. Section 101, the “No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act of 2008″ (NOPEC, how quaint) amends the Sherman Act, the country’s antitrust statutes, to prohibit any foreign state or agent thereof from working with another foreign state or agent thereof to limit the production of, set prices for, or otherwise restrain trade of oil, natural gas and petroleum products.
What right does the US have to extend our antitrust laws to foreign nations? This act is obviously targeted at OPEC, given its text and its apropos acronym, NOPEC. Now, I see the application of this to oil-related companies in the US which are owned by foreign governments or companies. However, if one of these companies were to be sued under antitrust laws, wouldn’t that suit give them justification to raise the prices in order afford the expensive legal process in the US?
It seems that Congress would be better off spending its time telling Japan to stop having a monopoly on Pocky or telling OPEC non-member Norway to stop being the #3 producer of oil in the world.
H.R. 6079. California Democrat Adam Schiff’s text for H.R. 6079 has not been released yet, but the description says it all:
To direct the Secretary of State to submit a report outlining the steps taken and plans made by the United States to end Turkey’s blockade of Armenia, and for other purposes.
What constitutional business has the US in meddling with arguments between Turkey and Armenia? The US is once again trying to be the bully settling the quarrel between two people it doesn’t usually pick on, thus trying to make itself feel better and look better even though it continues to illogically blockade allies of those two countries, plus many more!
H. Res. 1205: Noting that the Government of Iraq will likely enjoy $32 billion in surplus oil revenues in 2008…. Massachusetts’ Democrat William Delahunt’s H.R. 1205 recognizes that Iraq will bring in $32 billion in oil surplus this year and directs asks the government of Iraq to give $1 billion of that to refugees and displaced persons and that the Iraqi government give that money to other countries to help those countries afford the refugees. There are many clauses in the resolution, but a few are particularly outstanding:
Whereas the United States has a moral responsibility to assist those affected by the violence pervasive in Iraq since the United States invasion and should generously support the efforts of international and nongovernmental organizations to ease the human suffering of the displaced;
Mr. Delahunt, you may see a “moral responsibility” to assist, but I see a legal responsibility for the US to let the government of Iraq do what it deems right. We’ve already screwed up that country enough by meddling in its affairs and invading it without a constitutionally-required Congressional declaration of war. Money to help refugees wouldn’t be necessary if we’d have stopped military action when the “mission” was “accomplished.”
What do all of these bills have in common? They meddle in affairs of other nations and seek to impose our will and our laws in ways which are unconstitutional and illogical. No country has to listen to what another country’s politicians have to say.
If OPEC doesn’t play nice, what is the US going to do? Bomb them? Hardly, even that seems to be the most common answer to non-compliance with the wishes of Washington. If Turkey continues to blockade Armenia, what is the US going to do? Alienate our relations with Turkey in order to help out Armenia? Or are we just going to give guns to the Armenians and money to the Turks, like we did in the middle east with several nations there?
If Iraq won’t give $1 billion to its refugees, what is the US going to do? Will Bush or his successor promise to keep troops in Iraq or continue bombing, thus forcing even more Iraqis out of their homes?
The US has no ground on which it can stand in regard to these bills. It’s empty posturing by delusional politicians who think that they can exercise their will on anyone they choose.
