Chad buys a Lobbyist
Ben Campbell (Holland & Knight) has an "I'm impartial and Congress shouldn't" oped in The Hill. Chad'd timing is inadept as the resignation of assistant secretary Carl Artman is bigger news than anyone's oped.
A a work of political framing, the Campbell letter doesn't impress me. I can't see any of the staffers and members of the CBC reading "... individuals claiming to be descendants of slaves, known as Freedmen ..." and not having adverse responses to the entire text.
As a work of policy framing, the Campbell letter also fails to impress. If it is improper to make funding Chad's administration conditional, what is the Congressional Theory of the Federal-Tribal Relationship? That Congress can't decrease, maintain, or increase, appropriations except at the pleasure of each interested Tribal administration? That Congress can't manage its relationship with inferior domestic entities, like Oklahoma, through appropriations? If Oklahoma decides to abolish the speed limit on federal highways within Oklahoma, is the Congressional recourse limited to authorizing federal troops to enforce the speed limit on federal highways? Is the only constitutional recourse available to Congress for systematic voter suppression by an incumbent Tribal executive revisiting the Act which enabled elections?
Again, as a work of political framing, the Campbell letter is wicked beyond its sell-by date. Congress should defer to the Courts ... this Congress? The Pelosi/Reid Congress, should defer to a judiciary constrained by the precedents of the Rehnquist Court on a controversy that ultimately arises from voter disenfranchisement? That may have worked for the DeLay/Frist Congress, but that time has passed. This is Gore vs Bush for Indian Country, involving much more than just the CBC.
I keep wondering about how quickly assistant secretary Carl Artman signed off on Chad's "we're done with election oversight" letter.
