this government of the people, by the people, for the people

The following extensive quotations from one recent New York Times article and one recent New York Times editorial exemplifies the change made by the Bush / Republican regime in the definition of our American democracy. This change must be reversed.

New York Times, November 29, 2002, “A Capitol Hill Mystery: Who Aided Drug Maker?” by Sheryl Gay Stolberg


In a Washington whodunit worthy of Agatha Christie, the [Eli Lilly & Company] provision has become law, as part of the domestic security legislation signed on Monday by President Bush. Yet in a city where politicians have perfected the art of claiming credit for deeds large and small, not a single member of Congress - or the Bush administration - will admit to being the author of the Lilly rider. “There’s a lot of guessing, a lot of speculation as to who did this,” said Dave Lemmon, spokesman for Senator Debbie Stabenow, Democrat of Michigan.


The provision forces lawsuits over the preservative, developed by Eli Lilly and called thimerosal, into a special “vaccine court.” It may result in the dismissal of thousands of cases filed by parents who contend that mercury in thimerosal has poisoned their children, causing autism and other neurological ailments.


Washington is rife with speculation about who is responsible for aiding Lilly, a major Republican donor. During the 2002 election cycle, the company gave more money to political candidates, $1.6 million, than any other pharmaceutical company, with 79 percent of it going to Republicans.


The White House has said that it did not ask Congress for the provision.


Rob Smith, a spokesman for Lilly, said: “It’s a mystery to us how it got in there.”


On Capitol Hill, Congressional aides have traced the emergence of the provision to the Veterans Day weekend. Flush from their party’s victories on Election Day, and with a mandate from President Bush to pass a domestic security bill, Republican negotiators in the House and Senate holed up for three days in the Capitol to hammer out the details, said Richard Diamond, spokesman for the retiring House majority leader. Mr. Diamond said all the negotiators supported the move, but would not say who was responsible.


While Washington debates the origins, [victims’] families are fuming.


Mr. Smith, the Lilly spokesman, said his company would soon go to court to seek dismissal of the suits.


Aware of the controversy, lawmakers in both parties have pledged to alter the thimerosal rider, but are arguing about how to do so. While many Democrats want it repealed, Republicans have suggested that they may simply alter the language to apply to future cases only.


“I’ll believe it when I see it,” said Mr. Waters, a lawyer for one family.


* * * * *


Editorial, New York Times, November 30, 2002, “Why Judges Should Make Court Documents Public” by Stephen Gillers, vice dean of New York University School of Law, teaches legal ethics.


“The Justice Department asked a federal judge this week to seal documents that might otherwise aid parents in lawsuits against the maker of a mercury-based vaccine preservative called thimerosal, which parents claim caused their children’s autism. The department has the right to make the request, but if the court grants it, parents could by prevented from getting evidence that might prove their claims. The court should refuse.”


Mr. Gillers, vice dean of New York University School of Law, continues in his editorial: “[I]nformation that alerts the public to danger or that might help prove responsibility for injuries should be publicly available once it is filed in court.”



* * * * *


It stinks; it all stinks.