RSS
Home
Capitol mum on Harkey’s Guantanamo resolution:
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
California Assembly's 'foreign policy' policy unclear
Dana Point Republican Diane Harkey’s Resolution (AJR 5) to prevent Guantanamo prisoners from relocating to the Camp Pendleton Marine Base is stalled in the Rules Committee, and the Examiner can’t get a straight answer from anyone at the California capitol explaining why.
.jpg) |
| The Dalai Lama (AP Photo/Richard Vogel) |
An initial visit to Harkey’s office led me to the office of the Rules Committee where I inquired about the hang-up on AJR 5 and was told the Assembly doesn’t involve itself in matters of foreign policy. I was politely shooed to Speaker Karen Bass’s office with a simple question for which I needed an answer:
What is the origin of the Assembly’s “foreign policy” policy, and what does that policy entail?
After waiting for Bass’s communications representative, I was told she was very busy and was given her card with the aide’s assistant’s contact info and instruction to draft a memorandum saying what I wanted.
Here’s the memo:
Dear [EmployedStateWorker],
I appreciate your talking with me yesterday in the Speaker's Office. I am the reporter from […Examiner.com] that was inquiring about an Assembly policy regarding Diane Harkey's AJR 5 relating to Guantanamo prisoners. As you suggested, here is an outline of my efforts so far and what it is I'm trying to learn:
On March 28 I filed a story for both the Examiner and [a radio station] relating to Harkey's AJR 5--a resolution that seeks to prevent Guantanamo prisoners from being relocated to Camp Pendleton in Harkey's district.
Recently I called Harkey's office to find out the status of the resolution and was told by an aide that it was "stuck in the Rules Committee." I first called the offices of Lieu and Blakeslee to find out the source of the holdup, and was told something to the effect that "the Assembly does not involve itself in foreign policy," an approach I was told that has been in effect for at least a year. I was referred to the Speakers office for more information.
I went by the Rules Committee yesterday, May 19, and my business card was circulated before my being told again to address my questions to Bass's office.
My main interest at this point is to ascertain the origin and details of this Assembly policy that avoids matters of foreign policy. I find it a little strange that members would draft resolutions that they know would be invalidated by this policy--unless they aren't all aware of this policy. In any case, I need to know the truth of the matter as that is my obligation. I appreciate your help in clarifying this matter for me.
Sincerely,
Shawn Hamilton
I've been patient. I have reported from the capitol for years; I’m formally credentialed, and have always been able to get simple answers to apparently simple questions—usually within a few minutes or hours. It is, after all, the People’s right; we’re paying for it. But if I can’t get the information the usual way, perhaps I can get it this way.
This is the first time I have met with what I can only describe as a stone wall of silence. There may be a mundane explanation to account for this. I have been operating from that assumption since the beginning, but after more than two weeks of fruitless inquiry—not information-empty responses but no responses at all, I can only perceive it as highly unusual. Capitol folks usually respond with a certain degree of decorum even if they hate your guts.
I admit I’m tempted to think there may be a more interesting reason everyone I’ve talked to is silent on this issue although I’ll settle for the mundane explanation I initially anticipated.
If nothing else, perhaps a public airing of my unsuccessful reporting experience may be read by someone who knows the simple truth and is willing to talk. Hundreds of people work at the capitol; I can’t talk to them all. I’ve already spent hours talking with only two dozen or so. I emailed my elected representative, who is usually pretty responsive, and again heard nothing. Then I emailed legislators I thought might be receptive to helping me but still got nothing. I’m on an amazing losing streak with this story. If I believed in astrology, I might persuade myself that my stars lately have been inauspiciously aligned.
One aspect of this issue I was hoping to clarify involves a possible double standard. Blakeslee, who is now vice-chair of the Rules Committee, authored ACR 6 that recognizes the contributions of the Dalai Lama.
I have no problem with that; I’m a big fan of the Dalai Lama. I have family members in Taiwan who are formally involved in his teachings, but the issue does seem to involve foreign policy. I’m sure Mainland China isn’t thrilled to have the California legislature recognize its political nemesis. My curiosity is piqued. What is this “foreign policy” policy that would neuter Harkey’s AJR 5 but allow ACR 6? It’s not a simple matter of political party as both of the authors are Republicans.
Earlier this week I nudged the Speaker’s Office with this cordial reminder:
Dear [AnotherEmployedStateWorker],
Last week I sent a note through [AnEmployedStateWorker] that she sent on to you. It was regarding some confusion I'm having dealing with a Rules Committee policy or practice that apparently says the assembly avoids matters of foreign policy.
I know you're busy, but I'm going to have to file the story eventually and would prefer to do so fully armed with good information. I am primarily interested in the origin and details of this policy. I don't mean to bother you, but so far everyone has directed me to the Speaker's Office, so you seem to be my best hope for resolution.
Thanks, Shawn Hamilton
I don’t think I was too pushy or abrasive. I expected at least a polite, “We’ll get back to you,” but all I reaped, again, was silence. As of Monday, June 1, I’ve heard from no-one on the matter. It’s been two weeks of consistent and fruitless effort. Maybe the public can help, so I will again pose my simple question:
What is the origin of the California Assembly’s “foreign policy” policy, and what does that policy entail?
Related Articles:
Comments
.jpg)
Many of you are too young to remember the span of Arlen Specter’s career as a DC politician. In 1964 Specter was serving as junior counsel for …
.jpg)
"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect." Mark Twain Remember Japanese internment camps? …
- Background on AB 390: California’s Marijuana Control, Regulation, and Education Act
- Senator Mark Leno introduces resolution to protect cannabis clubs from feds
- Obama disses online community: pisses off Bill Maher with town hall cannabis comments
- Assemblymember Tom Ammiano reacts to DEA raid of SF cannabis medical dispensary
- San Francisco cannabis club raid a warning to Assemblymember Ammiano?
- Dennis Peron sacked by Oaksterdamn U for opposing marijuana tax/Santa Cruz County Drug Policy Examiner
