What Are They Afraid Of?

I tend to stay away from discussing politics with anyone, mostly because I am far from an expert on the subject, and I don't believe that I can intelligenly discuss many issues. One of the reasons for my ineptitude with all things political is that I really never had confidence in our political system. In fact, I didn't even vote in a presidental election until the Clinton/Bush election. My sister and I would often argue about my inertia when it came to voting, and I would always respond that I just didn't feel like my vote mattered. How ironic when the sentiment came true in the Bush/Gore election (even though I DID vot in that election)! I just realized I should have called my sister to rub it in when Gore won the popular vote but Bush won the election! Man, what a missed opportunity.

Anyway, what's making me nervous this week is this issue with the FBI search of the office of Congressman William Jefferson from Louisiana. C'mon, the dude had $90,000 in his freezer, this is not the behavior of an innocent (or at least not a sane) man. The thing that is scary about this news story is that as a result of this search, there was bipartisan agreement in Congress that this search by the FBI was illegal and that congressmen should have immunity from search by any branch of the justice department. These political parties cannot agree on ANYTHING lately, yet suddenly they agree on this. This leads me to the question - what in the world are these people afraid of? What are they hiding in their offices that they don't want the general public (or the justice department) to know about? I've read a couple of articles on this, and I can't even decipher what the constitution intends by the amendment that Congress thinks is being violated...here's an excerpt from a blog at the Chicago Tribune:

That protection rests in the “speech and debate clause” of Article I, Section 6 of the Constitution. It reads that senators and representatives “shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.”

The clause was meant to prevent members of Congress from being “intimidated” during political disagreements by the two other branches, the executive and judiciary, according to Charles Tiefer, a law professor at the University of Baltimore School of Law and a former legal counsel in both the House and Senate.

Ok, I agree that intimidation should not be a factor in the activities of Congress or the Senate, but I have long had an issue with diplomatic immunity. Just because of someone's status as a diplomat, it should not make them above the law that the remainder of the citizens of the United States (or in whatever country the diplomat is assigned) are held to. And, typical of Bush, rather than addressing the issue directly and takind a stand, he decided to seal all of the records to give everyone a "cooling off period". Are you kidding me? This is the solution?

How in the world is there any protection of Joe Citizen when our government officials (starting with the President) believe that they are above the laws that were created to protect our rights? How in the world can we protect ourselves if there is NO GROUP of individuals that has the right to investigate potential wrongdoings? The fact that our representatives from both parties in Congress are agreeing that their offices should be their own private domain not under the jurisdiction of any legal agency again leads me to the question, "Shouldn't WE be afraid of what they're afraid of us finding in there?"