THE 205-YEAR-OLD GORILLA IN THE ROOM
Would gladly trade away 14½ of that Warholian supposed 15 minutes of fame in order to ask just one question at any of the debates.
The recent plan originally proposed by Secretary Paulson, and to a lesser extent the economic aid bill in the House, removes judicial review of actions and spending. A multi-part question then:1) Do you support, oppose or are undecided regarding absolute removal provisions?
2) In concert with many other recent and contemporary similar exemptions, would you characterize these as efforts at chipping away at and/or politically neutralizing the third branch as far as review of governmental actions and policy?
3) Do you agree with and will you and your administration enforce Marbury v. Madison (ref.), establishing and validating judicial rulings of unconstitutionality?
