A One Play Act
<< Welcome Babalu Blog Readers! >>
The Logan Act.
200 years old, intended to prevent US citizens from negotiating with foreign governments in ways counter to the interests of the US Government, and apparently only used to bring an indictment once in over 200 years.
The Logan Act states:
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.
So why is this interesting now? Because members of the US Congress are violating this law today:
Reuters 12/15/2006 — The largest delegation from the U.S. Congress to visit Cuba since 1959 arrived in Havana on Friday seeking to open a dialogue with the communist government of acting President Raul Castro despite White House opposition to such contacts.
”We sense this is an important time and we hope to meet with officials and hopefully launch a new era in U.S.-Cuba relations,” said Rep. Jeff Flake an Arizona Republican.
The six Democrats and four Republicans hope to meet with Raul Castro, who took over July 31 after his brother underwent emergency surgery for an undisclosed illness.
The State Department opposed the trip, delegation members said. “The bottom line is, we think it is the right thing to do,” said Massachusetts Democrat Jim McGovern. “I’ve long thought our policy toward Cuba has been arrogant and dumb.”
Representative McGovern, you are entitled to your opinion, but you are legally obligated to uphold and abide by the laws of this country. You are in direct violation of the Logan Act the minute you set foot on Cuban soil to negotiate with a dictator-in-waiting in defiance of opposition from the State Department and the President of the United States. Same goes for your nine traveling companions, regardless of party affiliation.
“The U.S. Congress come January is under a different leadership and I think that on a bipartisan basis there is a desire to engage in dialogue and determine areas where we can agree, despite the fact that we will, I am sure, continue to have profound differences with the Cuban government,” said Rep. William Delahunt a Massachusetts Democrat.
What does the change in leadership of congress have to do with anything? Congress does not direct foreign policy, the President does.
This delegation needs to be held accountable for violating federal law. But as in so many occasions in the past, the Logan Act will likely be ignored and congressmen will continue to violate federal law without consequence.
Some references:
- CRS Report for Congress includes analysis of the act and some history
- Answers.com includes some good history
- The American Spectator provides an recent example where the act may have been violated with no action taken
Others commenting:
- Babalu Blog provides more insight
Stumble it!
January 27th, 2007 at 6:38 pm
[...] Oh sure, he still needs to face the voters of Massachusetts, but how tough is it to get elected in a state where Teddy Kennedy keeps getting sent back to Washington year after year even after the Chappaquiddick incident and reports he tried to subvert President Reagan’s foreign policy by offering to “assist Soviet leaders in formulating a public relations strategy to counter President Reagan’s foreign policy and to complicate his re-election efforts” (which some might view as treason, but at the very least is a likely violation of the Logan Act) how likely is it that Massachusetts would ever vote Kerry out of office for simply calling the United States a pariah? [...]
January 27th, 2007 at 6:51 pm
[...] Oh sure, he still needs to face the voters of Massachusetts, but how tough is it to get elected in a state where Teddy Kennedy keeps getting sent back to Washington year after year even after the Chappaquiddick incident and reports he tried to subvert President Reagan s foreign policy by offering to assist Soviet leaders in formulating a public relations strategy to counter President Reagan s foreign policy and to complicate his re-election efforts (which some might view as treason, but at the very least is a likely violation of the Logan Act) how likely is it that Massachusetts would ever vote Kerry out of office for simply calling the United States a pariah? [...]