The Test of a Democracy!
written by Fred Flanagan
Mar 22, 2006
written by Fred Flanagan
Mar 22, 2006
The Test of a Democracy!
The debate over secret spying on American citizens is one of the most important debates in recent
times. The needed investigation may never happen unless the members of the controlling political
party find enough backbone to demand an investigation. So far, the investigation of secret wiretaps
on American citizens has been blocked.
Our founding fathers knew the importance of checks and balances on government powers. In times of
war or imminent danger, the president does have the authority to take action. The question we face
now is why the president, who had the authority to take immediate action with a 72 hours requirement
to get a warrant from the FISA court, failed to report the wiretaps as required by law.
President Bush failed to ask for additional authority if he felt it was necessary, and he failed to report
the continued secret wiretaps for over two years.
President Bush may be honest and ethical: however, we would set a dangerous precedent if we allow
this action to go unquestioned. We need a serious investigation into why wiretaps were needed
outside of the available process provided in the Patriot Act.
Who was the administration spying on without a warrant and oversight? Why was this process
needed? These are the questions we need to ask of our government leaders. We have to protect our
constitution, civil liberties and avoid giving our elected leaders expanded authorities without
oversight.
Without checks and balances, we could have a serious abuse of power by individuals in power. Can
anyone remember Watergate? Does spying on political opponents and anti-war activists come to mind?
We can protect against possible terror threats and still preserve our democracy. The debate over
perceived or expanded presidential authority is crucial in a democracy.
Fred Flanagan
Copyright © 2006
[Back to Top]
times. The needed investigation may never happen unless the members of the controlling political
party find enough backbone to demand an investigation. So far, the investigation of secret wiretaps
on American citizens has been blocked.
Our founding fathers knew the importance of checks and balances on government powers. In times of
war or imminent danger, the president does have the authority to take action. The question we face
now is why the president, who had the authority to take immediate action with a 72 hours requirement
to get a warrant from the FISA court, failed to report the wiretaps as required by law.
President Bush failed to ask for additional authority if he felt it was necessary, and he failed to report
the continued secret wiretaps for over two years.
President Bush may be honest and ethical: however, we would set a dangerous precedent if we allow
this action to go unquestioned. We need a serious investigation into why wiretaps were needed
outside of the available process provided in the Patriot Act.
Who was the administration spying on without a warrant and oversight? Why was this process
needed? These are the questions we need to ask of our government leaders. We have to protect our
constitution, civil liberties and avoid giving our elected leaders expanded authorities without
oversight.
Without checks and balances, we could have a serious abuse of power by individuals in power. Can
anyone remember Watergate? Does spying on political opponents and anti-war activists come to mind?
We can protect against possible terror threats and still preserve our democracy. The debate over
perceived or expanded presidential authority is crucial in a democracy.
Fred Flanagan
Copyright © 2006
[Back to Top]
FLANCO ENTERPRISES * 7517 Camino Colegio * Rohnert Park * California * 94928
FLANAGAN UNLEASHED
Web site design by Flanco Enterprises
