::::::::
Last year was a disappointing one for those of us who hoped a Democrat-controlled Congress would begin to restore some of the balance that has been lost in the unchallenged expansion of executive power. If 2008 is to be better we will need new leaders and a new approach.
First of all let's look at who the leaders WON'T be. The odds are against either major party's nominee. Most are not speaking out on the issue at all and it is easy to see why. They are running to be the head of the executive branch and after all they are only human. They are looking at an office with a much freer hand, much less oversight and many more unchallenged claims than just a few years ago. I'm sure all of that would make the job of President much more enjoyable. They won't volunteer to give any of it up. Among those still vigorously campaigning only Ron Paul and Chris Dodd are on record as intending to take an active role in rolling back the abuses. The rest are not even if they might occasionally say nice things on the subject.
There probably won't be leadership from anyone in the traditional media, either. With primaries now and an election in November they will focus primarily, at times exclusively, on the horse race. Theorizing about potential members of the next government is much more exciting (and less work) than covering the actual members of the current one. That isn't the only dynamic at work, either. The romantic image of Woodward and Bernstein running down the story for the Washington Post in the face of open hostility from a contemptuous administration is, shall we say, dated. The days of low-level reporters for a major media outlet cultivating high-level sources that leak (against their own interests) incriminating details of a corrupt administration has been turned on its head. Instead we now have analyst/stars competing for morsels of self-serving propaganda from presumptively anonymous insiders, which they then pass along without scrutiny. There are some noble exceptions like Charlie Savage and Seymour Hersh, but their work struggles to be heard since they don't get published in the most widely read outlets. In fact, the Woodward and Bernstein of this generation are bloggers - people like Josh Marshall collecting reports of attorney firings in local newspapers and synthesizing it into a coherent picture of a conspiracy, or Marcy Wheeler doing the painstaking work to put together coherent timelines of executive abuses. Leadership in journalism is now shared with a widely scorned new medium.
Finally, leadership won't come from the existing leaders in Congress. In the Senate Judiciary Committee Pat Leahy and Arlen Specter are so comically inept that close observers don't even bother writing sincere headlines for each latest blast of bluster. Harry Reid is a Bush ally in executive power expansion and it has been truly astonishing to see him cooperate in his own job's emasculation. I have given up trying to understand why he does so; my best guess is that he is entirely cowed by the bullies in the White House, but the real reason is irrelevant. All that matters is results, and in that respect he is objectively pro-Bush. The same goes for Nancy Pelosi and Rahm Emanuel in the House. They may have an eye on politics and the election still almost a year away, but their electoral calculations and center-left strategizing has only served to legitimize the actions of the executive. It is nothing less than pure cynicism.
Leadership, then, will have to come from an assortment of places. We'll have to find leaders wherever we can, work around the "usual" centers of power and hope these alternatives can produce some fruit (or at least momentum). It won't help to call the Speaker's office, so how can we bypass the Speaker? We can support someone like Dodd in his effort to prevent telelcom amnesty or Robert Wexler's effort to begin impeachment hearings. We could start poking around a bit too. What exactly does it take to have a Speaker removed? How does a challenge get mounted? What are the different ways to do so and under what circumstances? It may not be practical in the end but it's at least worth looking in to. And in any event the presidential election most likely won't end with a mandate for a restoration of checks and balances. That will probably require a sustained effort in the legislative branch. In short, we will have to find leaders and support strategies where we can. Each issue will be different and will probably require a different approach. It is hardly ideal, but it seems to be the most viable option in the face of unified opposition at the top.
