For Shame, Mr. President
The Jewish community came together in a nationwide push to sign a petition calling for an investigation into the treatment of Sholom Rubashkin. This petition was second in signatures on the White House’s “We the People” website’s list of petitions, garnering over 52,00 signatures. The only larger petition in terms of signatures, was regarding legalizing Marijuana, consisting of 140,000 signatures collected through 7 different petitions.
The Jewish Community waited with great impatience for the President to consider the petition and respond to their concerns. Unfortunately they were greatly disappointed.
This is the WH’s response.
“Why We Can’t Comment
By: The White House
“Thank you for signing the petition “Call an Investigation into Allegations of Prosecutorial & Judicial Misconduct in the Case of Sholom Rubashkin.” We appreciate your participation in the We the People platform on WhiteHouse.gov.
As explained in the We the People Terms of Participation, the White House may at times decline to comment on certain specific matters properly within the jurisdiction of federal departments or agencies, federal courts, or state and local governments in its response to a petition. For important policy reasons, this includes specific law enforcement and judicial ethics matters. With respect to law enforcement matters, the Department of Justice is charged with investigating crime and enforcing our laws. The Department also has mechanisms in place to investigate allegations of prosecutorial misconduct, including through its Office of Professional Responsibility. With respect to judicial ethics matters, the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980 vests primary responsibility for investigating and adjudicating claims of judicial misconduct with the Judicial Branch.
This petition calls for an investigation into allegations of prosecutorial and judicial misconduct in the case of Sholom Rubashkin and for action to correct the “gross injustice” in his case. For the reasons given above, the White House declines to comment on matters raised by this petition.”
I would like to raise some points which I will juxtapose with the White House’ flaccid response. (comments in italics)
“Why We Can’t Comment
By: The White House
“Thank you for signing the petition “Call an Investigation into Allegations of Prosecutorial & Judicial Misconduct in the Case of Sholom Rubashkin.” We appreciate your participation in the We the People platform on WhiteHouse.gov.”
The White House can write? It must be an amazing sight to see a large white building typing an email. All kidding aside, it seems strange that a petition which garnered 50,000 signatures and was second on the list, would not even be graced with a no-comment by a White House official of some kind. Every other petition response was authored by an administration official or some sort, from Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, to Executive Director of the Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, to the Senior Advisor to CTO for Jobs and Competitiveness at the White House Office of Science & Technology Policy. It is a testament to the smarmy insincerity of the Obama administration, if they claim to accept and respond to the “People’s” petitions, yet cannot treat the second most popular petition with the consideration it deserves. Even according to White House logic, would it have been inappropriate for Eric Holder, or a deputy (Cole or Ogden) or some other Justice Department that is linked to the White House to have generated the response? Unacceptable.
“As explained in the We the People Terms of Participation, the White House may at times decline to comment on certain specific matters properly within the jurisdiction of federal departments or agencies, federal courts, or state and local governments in its response to a petition.”
What defines properly within the jurisdiction? It seem the White House has no problem running roughshod over state or local legislature when it suits their purposes. Take the Arizona immigration law, which was disapproved of by the White House. What did the White House do then? Did they refuse to comment, because the law was properly in the jurisdiction of the State of Arizona? NO! Since they decided that the matter was not in properly in the jurisdiction of the State of Arizona. They just sued to pursue their ends.
“For important policy reasons, this includes specific law enforcement and judicial ethics matters. With respect to law enforcement matters, the Department of Justice is charged with investigating crime and enforcing our laws. The Department also has mechanisms in place to investigate allegations of prosecutorial misconduct, including through its Office of Professional Responsibility. With respect to judicial ethics matters, the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980 vests primary responsibility for investigating and adjudicating claims of judicial misconduct with the Judicial Branch.”
“It is hard to understand the vague and indirect answer given here. Did the White House neglect to comment here because of important policy reasons, OR, did they not comment because their already mechanisms in place to investigate judicial impropriety? It is even harder to understand why the official response to a 50,000-signature petition of allegations of judicial misconduct would be answered with a boilerplate recorded response of “Oh,we have an office of people who take care of that judicial monkey business stuff, why don’t you go check with them.”
In contrast the White Houses’ response to the petition to legalize marijuana, (although illegal by existing law in most states) is a 500-word opinion response issued from none other than Gil Kerlikowske, the Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy. Following the White House’s policy of not commenting on matters that are both properly in the jurisdiction of federal, state, or local governments and covered under existing law or bureaucracy, a more suitable response to the marijuana petitions would have been as follows:
Why We Can’t Comment
By: The White House
“Thank you for signing the petition “Legalize and regulate Marijuana in a manner similar to Alcohol.” We appreciate your participation in the We the People platform on WhiteHouse.gov.”
As explained in the We the People Terms of Participation, the White House may at times decline to comment on certain specific matters properly within the jurisdiction of federal departments or agencies, federal courts, or state and local governments in its response to a petition.”
Marijuana is illegal; see the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 for more information.
This petition calls for legalizing and regulating Marijuana in a manner similar to Alcohol. For the reasons given above, the White House declines to comment on matters raised by this petition.”
It is apparent that the White House program of the “We the People” petition is not a real tool for communication with the powers that be, but rather a forum for the White House to trumpet its current polices stances and a method for currying favor with disenfranchised voters who feel they have no say over there own lives, a clever ruse nothing more nothing less, for shame, Mr. President. For Shame.
This sentiment is actually echoed in a recent petition created on the “We The People” website:
https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions/!/petition/actually-take-these-petitions-seriously-instead-just-using-them-excuse-pretend-you-are-listening/grQ9mNkN
“WE PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO:
Actually take these petitions seriously instead of just using them as an excuse to pretend you are listening
Although the ability to submit petitions directly to the White House is a noble and welcome new feature of the current administration, the first round of responses makes blatantly clear the White House intends to just support its current stances and explain them with responses everyone who has done any research already knows.
An online petition is not meant as a replacement for using a search box in a web browser. We the People, those who grant you the power to govern in the first place, are requesting changes in policy directly, circumventing legislators who already do not listen to us. We the People request you govern FOR us, which means actually listening to us and actually acting in our interests instead of special interests.
You are not above us. You ARE us. Govern accordingly.”
P.S. This petition is only a few days old and has 11,600 signatures… Any one who has signed the Rubashkin petition may want to take the time to sign this petition as well.