One of the benefits to working in an office where there are far too many interns for the work available is that we get to go a relatively high number of events on the Hill outside of the office, such as hearings, briefings and receptions.
Committee hearings are essentially the organs of the legislative process; bills that have been introduced to either house of Congress are passed over to the committees to be examined, amended etc, and otherwise select committees can be convened to look into specialised topics. But until today I've been thoroughly underwhelmed by what I've seen in committee hearings, both at the full-committee and sub-committee level, to the extent that I've not been enthusiastic about going along to some that have come up.
For instance, last week, the Judiciary Committee held a hearing into the Bush presidency. It was bound to be controversial - but the various members couldn't even agree as to whether it was the first step down the road to impeachment or not. Two hours later and the witnesses hadn't even finished making their opening statements. I left, thoroughly bored and disenchanted with what should have been a groundbreaking and incredibly far reaching hearing. But today I went along to one at a committee I've never been to before, the Committee on Science and Technology, and for a change, was thoroughly impressed. So let me compare and contrast that committee with the Judiciary committee - the committee I've perhaps spent the most time watching.
The Judiciary committee is obviously one of the more prestigious in the House and as such, it seems to be staffed by people with inflated egos and agendas. A typical hearing, whether designed to look into proposed legislation or undertaking an investigation starts with ALL of the committee reading out their opening statements (all of which are available on paper) and in doing so usually far exceeding their alloted five minutes to make partisan points, either because they say too much, or because they speak so incredibly slowly. The witnesses then do the same with their opening statements which have already been circulated to all present. By this point, in my experience it's not unusual for two-hours to have elapsed, yet nothing has actually happened. When the questioning starts a sizable chunk of the time is taken up with each side making 'points of order' and issuing 'parliamentary inquiries' which are usually batted aside by the Chair, but not before they've used up more time. Today for instance the issue was legislation on allowing people to make claims against the Iraqi government in US courts for compensation for torture. After starting an hour late, the next 45 minutes consisted predominantly of sniping, before one member asked to make a point of order, to which another candidly replied "he doesn't have one". It's such a shame to see such an important committee descend into such a farce, especially when at the end not enough members had stuck around to make up a quorum, so the vote had to be postponed anyway.
The contrast with the Science and Technology Committee couldn't have been greater. Granted, it was a hearing on the future of NASA, to which both the Democrats and the few Republicans who showed up seemed to share a broad consensus, and John Glen was testifying, but the whole thing was slickly run and respectable and it actually felt like the hearing achieved something. Opening statements were limited to the two senior committee members, and the witnesses stuck to the time limits. The questioning was civil and again, time limits were strictly enforced. The result? All over in two hours, everyone present (both members and audience) stayed until the end, and the process just seemed to work as it's meant too.
Of course, there's not so much to be gained on the Science and Technology Committee as there is on the Judiciary one, but it's striking just how dissimilar two committees can be and I can only put it down to partisanship and the leadership skills of the committee chair. Judiciary is incredibly partisan, and the chair is largely ineffective. Science and Technology had a strong, yet fair, and likable chair and there was broad respect across the aisle.
Everyone talks about needing to build a bi-partisan consensus to get anything done here. I'd wager that it's not about consensus so much as a mutual respect regardless of ideology and an acknowledgment that the good of the process depends on more than petty squabbles about terminology and technicalities which can only serve to score cheap political points at the expense of political progress.
31/07/2008
28/07/2008
A Very British Reception
Just after the internship started we heard that we'd be meeting with the British Ambassador, but we knew not why nor quite how. Last Wednesday our questions were answered, at least in part.
After not having been at work due to spending the day at the Library of Congress having an induction to the 'Fundamentals of Federal Legal Research' in the slightly misplaced hope that it would prove to be a sort of taster of what legal study in the US might be like, I decided to walk to the British Embassy. It seemed like it would be a nice walk through leafy greens towards the US Naval Observatory, but unfortunately, when I found myself walking through a wood and along gravel lanes with little idea of whether I was heading in the right direction with less than ten minutes to go before I was supposed to be there, walking seemed like a poor decision. But I finally made it just in time to be ushered through.
We only found out what the occasion was when we were given our name tags with 'British American Business Association' (affectionately known as BABA) printed across the top. Having never been to an Embassy reception I had no clue of what to expect, and things seemed bad when the first thing we had to do was the whole cringeworthy lining up to shake hands with important people, themselves lined up, and who probably have little interest in what you've got to say, or any reason to remember you afterwards - especially when you're in a situation like me where the name tag in saying 'Intern' just about says all there is to say.
.JPG)
Being outsiders to the event it was a little difficult to work up the enthusiasm to network, and our meeting with the British Ambassador lasted just about long enough for a handshake and a photograph. But the Embassy itself is impressive and in a pretty imposing position up on Massachusetts Avenue beyond the Embassy Row quarter of town. The gardens were pretty and plentiful and the Ambassador's residence where the event was held was fittingly grand.
It was odd being surrounded by so many British people again. We're still living together as British interns, but we know each other well enough not to think of each other as being British, so to hear all these unfamiliar voices in familiar accents was initially slightly disconcerting.
Unfortunately, we had been promised 'heavy finger food', which didn't materialise, so we had to make speedy dinner plans after being ushered out after little more than an hour to clear the way for a dinner the Ambassador was hosting that same evening. Unfortunately, just as with the day before the weather intervened at this point by delivering yet another torrential downpour that turned the sky pitch black just as we were exiting the Metro. Washington DC doesn't seem to have much time for us.
After not having been at work due to spending the day at the Library of Congress having an induction to the 'Fundamentals of Federal Legal Research' in the slightly misplaced hope that it would prove to be a sort of taster of what legal study in the US might be like, I decided to walk to the British Embassy. It seemed like it would be a nice walk through leafy greens towards the US Naval Observatory, but unfortunately, when I found myself walking through a wood and along gravel lanes with little idea of whether I was heading in the right direction with less than ten minutes to go before I was supposed to be there, walking seemed like a poor decision. But I finally made it just in time to be ushered through.
We only found out what the occasion was when we were given our name tags with 'British American Business Association' (affectionately known as BABA) printed across the top. Having never been to an Embassy reception I had no clue of what to expect, and things seemed bad when the first thing we had to do was the whole cringeworthy lining up to shake hands with important people, themselves lined up, and who probably have little interest in what you've got to say, or any reason to remember you afterwards - especially when you're in a situation like me where the name tag in saying 'Intern' just about says all there is to say.
.JPG)
Being outsiders to the event it was a little difficult to work up the enthusiasm to network, and our meeting with the British Ambassador lasted just about long enough for a handshake and a photograph. But the Embassy itself is impressive and in a pretty imposing position up on Massachusetts Avenue beyond the Embassy Row quarter of town. The gardens were pretty and plentiful and the Ambassador's residence where the event was held was fittingly grand.
It was odd being surrounded by so many British people again. We're still living together as British interns, but we know each other well enough not to think of each other as being British, so to hear all these unfamiliar voices in familiar accents was initially slightly disconcerting.
Unfortunately, we had been promised 'heavy finger food', which didn't materialise, so we had to make speedy dinner plans after being ushered out after little more than an hour to clear the way for a dinner the Ambassador was hosting that same evening. Unfortunately, just as with the day before the weather intervened at this point by delivering yet another torrential downpour that turned the sky pitch black just as we were exiting the Metro. Washington DC doesn't seem to have much time for us.
The White House
Every day on my way home from work I walk up Pennsylvania Avenue and past the White House. It's a hugely enigmatic building, and it's striking in its simplicity both from the front and from the back. I'd go so far as to say that it's a good job the British didn't succeed in burning it to the ground. Not that the same can be said for the horribly over the top Eisenhower Executive Building to the west - if that had been around in 1812 it should have been the first to go.
On Tuesday last week I finally got a chance to go inside, and as a result got the morning off work as well. Unfortunately the wonderful Washington DC weather conspired, as it so often does, to catch me without an umbrella and hence by the time I'd finished waiting in the (surprisingly short) queue to get inside, I was soaked through. But, of course, the sunny smiles of all the security staff practically dried me out.
The tour itself is odd. Given the security, the ban on cameras, and the difficulty in getting on a tour, I was expecting it to be guided once you got inside to keep people together, but it's self guided, to the extent that you can spend as long as you want inside. Practically, the pathway is clearly marked and narrow enough to make sure that the line keeps moving, and there's security at every turn to keep you in check. You don't actually get to see that much once inside apart from the state rooms, which are very... stately. I've heard others compare it to a British National Trust property, and it's not a bad comparison to make. Of course, it is very grand inside, everything is in its rightful place and there is an innate grandeur, it's not exceptional. Perhaps the hurried nature of the process through didn't help - it only took about 25 minutes from walking in to walking out - and at the end of the day I can at least say I've been inside the White House, but the rooms we walked through obviously aren't typical of the property. I guess it's been spoiled by the promise of TV's the West Wing!
Last year's ESU interns were fantastically lucky in that they by chance met the White House Press Secretary at a reception and who later organised a personal tour of the White House for them, including a visit to the Oval Office. Now that would have been quite something indeed.
On Tuesday last week I finally got a chance to go inside, and as a result got the morning off work as well. Unfortunately the wonderful Washington DC weather conspired, as it so often does, to catch me without an umbrella and hence by the time I'd finished waiting in the (surprisingly short) queue to get inside, I was soaked through. But, of course, the sunny smiles of all the security staff practically dried me out.
The tour itself is odd. Given the security, the ban on cameras, and the difficulty in getting on a tour, I was expecting it to be guided once you got inside to keep people together, but it's self guided, to the extent that you can spend as long as you want inside. Practically, the pathway is clearly marked and narrow enough to make sure that the line keeps moving, and there's security at every turn to keep you in check. You don't actually get to see that much once inside apart from the state rooms, which are very... stately. I've heard others compare it to a British National Trust property, and it's not a bad comparison to make. Of course, it is very grand inside, everything is in its rightful place and there is an innate grandeur, it's not exceptional. Perhaps the hurried nature of the process through didn't help - it only took about 25 minutes from walking in to walking out - and at the end of the day I can at least say I've been inside the White House, but the rooms we walked through obviously aren't typical of the property. I guess it's been spoiled by the promise of TV's the West Wing!
Last year's ESU interns were fantastically lucky in that they by chance met the White House Press Secretary at a reception and who later organised a personal tour of the White House for them, including a visit to the Oval Office. Now that would have been quite something indeed.
21/07/2008
Lazy Sunday
After the frolics and mileage of Saturday, today has been an altogether more laid back affair. This morning I ventured up to Dupont Circle to visit the weekly Farmer's Market there. I went last time I was in DC with the mooting competition, but didn't have a good chance to look around, so it was nice to be able to spend a decent amount of time there trying the free samples and surveying what was on offer; just about everything it transpired. The queue for one stall was so long that I just had to join the line to see what was so good about it - the resulting croissant didn't disappoint.
Afterwards we all met up to go to Kramer's Books for, oddly enough, brunch. It's a wonderful place, It's basically a book store, but out the back is a cafe/bar/restaurant which serves one of the best brunches in DC, and again, the queue length is testament to that. Fortunately, the other's being late meant that we actually avoided the earlier morning rush and got seated straight away. The menu was extensive, and the choice hard, but I settled on pancakes with assorted berries and walnut syrup with scrambled eggs, sausage and fried potatoes, washed down with complimentary orange juice. It was good, very good, although I think Charlie's banana French toast probably just edged out mine. A place that I'd certainly be happy going to every Sunday. And every other day for that matter.
After that, feeling universally stuffed, we retired for a rest before heading to the river to the same place we hired the bikes from last week to hire kayaks for a bit of a paddle on the Potomac. It took about seven minutes for Alex and Charlie to capsize and get the full Potomac experience, and Ed followed suit about twenty minutes later. Alice, Corey and I managed to stay in our kayaks, but the amount of splashing meant that we weren't any drier, and still weren't by the time we'd walked back home. Alex's and Charlie's attendant was less than impressed by the level of water in their kayak, but it was great fun, and a shame we didn't do it for longer. But there's always next weekend when we're being taken boating by one of the ESU guys here in Washington. So that should be worth looking forward to, and won't need the physical exertion of paddling. Hopefully.
Afterwards we all met up to go to Kramer's Books for, oddly enough, brunch. It's a wonderful place, It's basically a book store, but out the back is a cafe/bar/restaurant which serves one of the best brunches in DC, and again, the queue length is testament to that. Fortunately, the other's being late meant that we actually avoided the earlier morning rush and got seated straight away. The menu was extensive, and the choice hard, but I settled on pancakes with assorted berries and walnut syrup with scrambled eggs, sausage and fried potatoes, washed down with complimentary orange juice. It was good, very good, although I think Charlie's banana French toast probably just edged out mine. A place that I'd certainly be happy going to every Sunday. And every other day for that matter.
After that, feeling universally stuffed, we retired for a rest before heading to the river to the same place we hired the bikes from last week to hire kayaks for a bit of a paddle on the Potomac. It took about seven minutes for Alex and Charlie to capsize and get the full Potomac experience, and Ed followed suit about twenty minutes later. Alice, Corey and I managed to stay in our kayaks, but the amount of splashing meant that we weren't any drier, and still weren't by the time we'd walked back home. Alex's and Charlie's attendant was less than impressed by the level of water in their kayak, but it was great fun, and a shame we didn't do it for longer. But there's always next weekend when we're being taken boating by one of the ESU guys here in Washington. So that should be worth looking forward to, and won't need the physical exertion of paddling. Hopefully.
Appreciating Old Town Alexandria
After last weekend's Metro troubles, my extended visit to Mount Vernon meant my plans to visit Old Town Alexandria on the way back died a death. However, yesterday they were resurrected when, despite yet more Metro holdups, I finally made it.
It's a wonderfully pretty, and dare I say it, quaint place. It's very European, or I guess, colonial, in feel with tree lined streets, old terraced houses, running down to the pier and harbour down on the waterfront. I don't think I've ever felt so immediately at home in America as I did walking around Alexandria. There's not really anything to do there but walk, but the old streets were reward enough for me after a quick breakfast at a local bakery.
A lot of the terraces wouldn't have been out of place in the UK, and nor would the boutique style shops that far outnumbered the chain stores. It's perhaps a little odd that in a country that rather spectacularly threw off the shackles of Monarchy that the two main streets should be called King and Prince's Street, but Alexandria is older than DC itself and so does have a history dating back to the time when America was a colony, hence it's European and familiar feel. Although at least one resident appears to have split loyalties when it comes to the outcome of the War of Independence.
After spending a couple of hours just walking the street and strolling around the waterfront marina, I decided to head back to DC. However, after a spying a sign for a 'waterfront path', I decided to leave the Metro to it's engineering works and walk back along the Potomac, a trip of about 6 miles and two and a half hours. But it was worth every step, although I did bottle out when I reached Arlington and get on the Metro.
The walk itself was, ironically, part of the pathway to Mount Vernon and largely followed the Potomac river northwards, with occasional dips in and out of forests, marinas and picnic areas along the way, but it never went near a residential or commercial area (aside from a brief skirt around Reagan National Airport and some accompanying impressive close up views of landing aircraft), and there were few people on the trail, so it was a pretty quiet, but scenic couple of hours back to DC.
By the time I'd finished I'd acquired a pair of sore feet, one blister and an oddly shaped, and oddly placed, patch of sunburn on my right shoulder. I think I then pushed my luck by getting on the Metro to visit the Georgetown University Law bookshop, only to get there and find it closed. So I ventured the short distance to Union Station as I remembered there being a smoothie bar there. Unfortunately I'd forgotten that it was a pretty rubbish smoothie bar, but it didn't take long to rekindle.
After stumbling back to the flat and phoning home, we went out for dinner at an Ethiopian restaurant recommended by some of Cecily's friends. There are plenty of Ethiopian restaurants here and we'd been wanting to try one for a while, but I have to confess to being a little underwhelmed by it. The food was fine and I'd go again, but unlike some of the others I wasn't that big a fan. The dishes were certainly unlike anything I'd had before - different varieties of cooked meet served on a sort of bread pancake called an injera. Unfortunately a friend once described such an injera as having the texture of leather and the taste of vinegar, and I have to agree with his tastebuds. They're basically pancakes made with sour dough starter, and hence are very sour, which I suppose is necessary to contrast with the spices of the main dishes, but unfortunately not really to my taste.
On the way back we passed Ben's Chili Diner, which is (for somewhat different reasons) a Washington DC institution and similarly recommended by just about everyone. No doubt we'll pay it a visit at some point, hopefully I'll appreciate it more than it's neighbour.
It's a wonderfully pretty, and dare I say it, quaint place. It's very European, or I guess, colonial, in feel with tree lined streets, old terraced houses, running down to the pier and harbour down on the waterfront. I don't think I've ever felt so immediately at home in America as I did walking around Alexandria. There's not really anything to do there but walk, but the old streets were reward enough for me after a quick breakfast at a local bakery.
A lot of the terraces wouldn't have been out of place in the UK, and nor would the boutique style shops that far outnumbered the chain stores. It's perhaps a little odd that in a country that rather spectacularly threw off the shackles of Monarchy that the two main streets should be called King and Prince's Street, but Alexandria is older than DC itself and so does have a history dating back to the time when America was a colony, hence it's European and familiar feel. Although at least one resident appears to have split loyalties when it comes to the outcome of the War of Independence.
After spending a couple of hours just walking the street and strolling around the waterfront marina, I decided to head back to DC. However, after a spying a sign for a 'waterfront path', I decided to leave the Metro to it's engineering works and walk back along the Potomac, a trip of about 6 miles and two and a half hours. But it was worth every step, although I did bottle out when I reached Arlington and get on the Metro.
The walk itself was, ironically, part of the pathway to Mount Vernon and largely followed the Potomac river northwards, with occasional dips in and out of forests, marinas and picnic areas along the way, but it never went near a residential or commercial area (aside from a brief skirt around Reagan National Airport and some accompanying impressive close up views of landing aircraft), and there were few people on the trail, so it was a pretty quiet, but scenic couple of hours back to DC.
By the time I'd finished I'd acquired a pair of sore feet, one blister and an oddly shaped, and oddly placed, patch of sunburn on my right shoulder. I think I then pushed my luck by getting on the Metro to visit the Georgetown University Law bookshop, only to get there and find it closed. So I ventured the short distance to Union Station as I remembered there being a smoothie bar there. Unfortunately I'd forgotten that it was a pretty rubbish smoothie bar, but it didn't take long to rekindle.
After stumbling back to the flat and phoning home, we went out for dinner at an Ethiopian restaurant recommended by some of Cecily's friends. There are plenty of Ethiopian restaurants here and we'd been wanting to try one for a while, but I have to confess to being a little underwhelmed by it. The food was fine and I'd go again, but unlike some of the others I wasn't that big a fan. The dishes were certainly unlike anything I'd had before - different varieties of cooked meet served on a sort of bread pancake called an injera. Unfortunately a friend once described such an injera as having the texture of leather and the taste of vinegar, and I have to agree with his tastebuds. They're basically pancakes made with sour dough starter, and hence are very sour, which I suppose is necessary to contrast with the spices of the main dishes, but unfortunately not really to my taste.
On the way back we passed Ben's Chili Diner, which is (for somewhat different reasons) a Washington DC institution and similarly recommended by just about everyone. No doubt we'll pay it a visit at some point, hopefully I'll appreciate it more than it's neighbour.
20/07/2008
DC by Candlelight
On Friday night we decided to go and see the new Batman film. Unfortunately, so did the rest of DC's population, so we ended up not going to the cinema until 11:45, which gave me a perfect opportunity to do a bit of night-time exploring.
I've said before how DC is just a lovely city to stroll around, and I much prefer walking everywhere to taking the Metro, but it's especially true when the sun starts set and dusk falls - all of the important buildings and monuments are wonderfully lit up and the whole place takes on a completely different and spellbinding atmosphere. I started off walking up to the White House as the sun was setting to get my 'West Wing DVD Boxset' shot of it, before heading down to the Mall.
The Mall is impressive in the day time, the sheer scale of it is amazing. But at night it has a new quality as you can't see the bits in between the lit up parts, everything becomes disconnected and a little more mystical. There were a group of Falon Gong supporters sat by the Washington Monument, each wearing yellow and holding a single candle, which made for a spectacular sight in the early evening light. It's a shame the photo can't capture the music they had playing at the same time.
Afterwards, the Monument itself was subtly lit and with the flags surrounding the base the place felt oddly serene. Again, I think the lack of any view beyond the immediately lit up areas focuses attention more on what's there. That was certainly the case at the World War Two Memorial, which although lovely, isn't as memorable as the others by day, but at night with the fountains and water spouts all lit up, it becomes something pretty much completely different.
The same's true of the Lincoln Memorial. It's impressive by day, but in my view it gets eclipsed by the other things on the Mall, but at night, it's white simplicity means it stands out above everything else, both inside and out. There are still hundreds of people around, but the atmosphere again is completely different, just a lot more laid back and relaxed.
The White House though almost goes in the opposite direction come night. Whereas I think nighttime brings out the Lincoln and World War Two Memorials, I think it underplays the White House, but I think that's probably intended. By just lighting up the building and not the gardens, and with having to stand so far away, it recedes into the background and takes on a subtly that it doesn't have by day.
DC is so different by night, and I think I probably prefer it then. It's a shame then that on the whole places are so much quieter in the evenings as it can only mean people are missing out on sights that they think they've already seen, only they really haven't.
I've said before how DC is just a lovely city to stroll around, and I much prefer walking everywhere to taking the Metro, but it's especially true when the sun starts set and dusk falls - all of the important buildings and monuments are wonderfully lit up and the whole place takes on a completely different and spellbinding atmosphere. I started off walking up to the White House as the sun was setting to get my 'West Wing DVD Boxset' shot of it, before heading down to the Mall.
The Mall is impressive in the day time, the sheer scale of it is amazing. But at night it has a new quality as you can't see the bits in between the lit up parts, everything becomes disconnected and a little more mystical. There were a group of Falon Gong supporters sat by the Washington Monument, each wearing yellow and holding a single candle, which made for a spectacular sight in the early evening light. It's a shame the photo can't capture the music they had playing at the same time.
Afterwards, the Monument itself was subtly lit and with the flags surrounding the base the place felt oddly serene. Again, I think the lack of any view beyond the immediately lit up areas focuses attention more on what's there. That was certainly the case at the World War Two Memorial, which although lovely, isn't as memorable as the others by day, but at night with the fountains and water spouts all lit up, it becomes something pretty much completely different.
The same's true of the Lincoln Memorial. It's impressive by day, but in my view it gets eclipsed by the other things on the Mall, but at night, it's white simplicity means it stands out above everything else, both inside and out. There are still hundreds of people around, but the atmosphere again is completely different, just a lot more laid back and relaxed.
The White House though almost goes in the opposite direction come night. Whereas I think nighttime brings out the Lincoln and World War Two Memorials, I think it underplays the White House, but I think that's probably intended. By just lighting up the building and not the gardens, and with having to stand so far away, it recedes into the background and takes on a subtly that it doesn't have by day.
DC is so different by night, and I think I probably prefer it then. It's a shame then that on the whole places are so much quieter in the evenings as it can only mean people are missing out on sights that they think they've already seen, only they really haven't.
18/07/2008
A Torturing Sequel
After going to the hearing on torture on Tuesday I went along to the 'sequel' one today before the full Judiciary committee in the House. John Ashcroft, the former Attorney General was one of the witnesses testifying. The hearing itself was much less charged than the one on Tuesday, despite it being a full committee with higher ranking witnesses, and the exchanges were surprisingly civilised despite the difference of opinions held by those on both sides of the debate.
It was probably less interesting than the one on Tuesday, but it was more thoughtful, so I wanted to follow up on what I wrote before about extreme cases making bad law.
One of the witnesses, Benjamin Wittes advocated a law that would permit the President to authorise torture in extreme cases so long as he publicised his authorisation. But another, Walter Dellinger, the assisstant Attorney General under President Clinton, was forthright in his disfavour for such an idea, and I have to agree. No state, or at least no state based on the rule of law and respect for basic human dignity should officially sanction torture, even in the ticking time bomb scenario. Walter Dellinger's solution was that when the ticking time bomb situation arose, the President should sanction torture, then admit his breach of the law and submit to the ordinary criminal process - in essence, he advocated civil disobedience in such a case. It's not an immediately compelling approach, the idea that the law basically 'runs out' is uncomfortable, but I think he's right here. Any law that sanctions torture, that essentially admits a country practices and condones torture is dangerous. Firstly it degrades that country's right to call itself civilised. Secondly it increases the chances of other countries following suit and practicing torture on the citizens of those countries with such laws. Thirdly, it could be the start of a very slippery slope. The civil disobedience approach reconciles the two strands I pointed out in my other post. Torture is illegal, but that's not to say it can't be justified, but that justification should not be legal. Perhaps it could result in a pardon - although who would pardon the President? - but the importance of the conviction would stand.
Beyond the torture debate though, the hearing was interesting for any number of legal reasons. For instance, the authority (or otherwise) of the President to set aside validly passed laws is crucial to the debate. One strand of thought is that he simply can't. Another is that where he has serious doubts as to the constitutionality of the law, he can do so. There's nothing in the Constitution either way, but neither does the Constitution give the Supreme Court the power of judicial review - a power it assumed for itself. What's to say that the President can't assume the same?
There's a lot more to this, like the Supreme Court's ambiguous and highly flexible definition of toture - compared to the expansive definition put forward by the European Court of Human Rights, and the constant sniping by the Republicans and their constant appeals to 9/11 and the threat's we still face. Debate at this level of importance needs to move beyond such things for it actually to be worth anything. Hopefully, the hearing today will set the standard for the future. I'll be interested to read the eventual report.
It was probably less interesting than the one on Tuesday, but it was more thoughtful, so I wanted to follow up on what I wrote before about extreme cases making bad law.
One of the witnesses, Benjamin Wittes advocated a law that would permit the President to authorise torture in extreme cases so long as he publicised his authorisation. But another, Walter Dellinger, the assisstant Attorney General under President Clinton, was forthright in his disfavour for such an idea, and I have to agree. No state, or at least no state based on the rule of law and respect for basic human dignity should officially sanction torture, even in the ticking time bomb scenario. Walter Dellinger's solution was that when the ticking time bomb situation arose, the President should sanction torture, then admit his breach of the law and submit to the ordinary criminal process - in essence, he advocated civil disobedience in such a case. It's not an immediately compelling approach, the idea that the law basically 'runs out' is uncomfortable, but I think he's right here. Any law that sanctions torture, that essentially admits a country practices and condones torture is dangerous. Firstly it degrades that country's right to call itself civilised. Secondly it increases the chances of other countries following suit and practicing torture on the citizens of those countries with such laws. Thirdly, it could be the start of a very slippery slope. The civil disobedience approach reconciles the two strands I pointed out in my other post. Torture is illegal, but that's not to say it can't be justified, but that justification should not be legal. Perhaps it could result in a pardon - although who would pardon the President? - but the importance of the conviction would stand.
Beyond the torture debate though, the hearing was interesting for any number of legal reasons. For instance, the authority (or otherwise) of the President to set aside validly passed laws is crucial to the debate. One strand of thought is that he simply can't. Another is that where he has serious doubts as to the constitutionality of the law, he can do so. There's nothing in the Constitution either way, but neither does the Constitution give the Supreme Court the power of judicial review - a power it assumed for itself. What's to say that the President can't assume the same?
There's a lot more to this, like the Supreme Court's ambiguous and highly flexible definition of toture - compared to the expansive definition put forward by the European Court of Human Rights, and the constant sniping by the Republicans and their constant appeals to 9/11 and the threat's we still face. Debate at this level of importance needs to move beyond such things for it actually to be worth anything. Hopefully, the hearing today will set the standard for the future. I'll be interested to read the eventual report.
16/07/2008
To torture, or not to torture, is that even the question?
I think that yesterday I might have become a Democrat.
One of the perks of being an intern is that I get to sit in on some of the Senate and House hearings on issues as diverse as Parkinson's disease in military veterans to America's oil reserves. On Monday I attended a Senate Republican forum on the need to advance judicial nominations through the appointment process. Coming from a country where judges aren't appointed so much as annointed, the whole process of legislative approval seems odd, but all the more so when the impact of a shortage of judges on the legal process is properly considered. The problem was thus. The Democrats on the Judiciary Committee were refusing to hold hearings for some of President Bush's judicial nominations, citing a dubious rule that such hearings would be slowed in the year of a presidential election. Now, it seems unlikely that this rule exists, but even if it did, how can it possibly be right that politics interferes with the judicial and legal process? All of the witnesses made the same point convincingly, and the point seems so obvious so as not to need debate. So what was the point in the whole forum? I can only assume it was grandstanding. There were eight Republican Senators there, 8% of the whole, for two-hours, stating the blindingly obvious, asking questions designed to produce set piece answers and congratulating themselves on their sterling and tireless work on the committee.
I'm sure that given two-hours, these eight Senators could have made much more productive use of their time. Of course, the issue was important, and given the press-coverage of the forum hopefully their message got out - judicial appointments need to go forward. But it was for all the wrong reasons, to seek to portray the Democrats as stalers and spoilers, which they might well be, but the evidence suggested the Republicans did the same under Clinton, albeit to a slightly lesser extent. The whole thing only illustrates why law and politics do not mix.
The hearing I went to this morning threw this into sharp contrast. This morning saw one in a series of the House hearings on the torture and interrogration techniques used on terrorist suspects. The significance of the hearing was obvious from the length of the queue outside the room an hour before it started, and the number of protesters in the room. The Democrat-Republican divide was clear almost from the outset and it's a divide that in my opinion did the Republicans no favours whatsoever. There's a blog that I try to keep up to date with, called Head of Legal. It's written by a former legal advisor to Tony Blair, and is usually pretty spot on in its analysis. I'm nowhere near as qualified as he is, but I'd like to offer a few observances on what I saw today.
To say I was appalled would be an understatement, I couldn't actually go straight back to the office afterwards as I needed to cool down a bit. Almost immediately Mr Franks, the Republican ranking member asked why there had been no hearings on protecting the rights of American citizens and the need to move on from going over past acts - and there and then the debate was framed. While Democrats presented the hearing in terms of the need to uphold the rule of law and respect for the constitution at all times regardless of the wishes of the administration, the Republicans without fail resorted to putting the hearing into the context of 9/11, the dangers consequent, and the need to protect American lives and in so doing straight away lowered the level of debate. Two of my favourite quotes came from one Mr Pence who stated firstly that "I try not to think like a lawyer. I try to think like an American" to suggest the average American did not care about legal 'niceties', and secondly "It is imperative that the United States upholds the rule of law. But...", which I don't even think needs completing to illustrative the futility of the statement.
At one level, such appeals to 9/11 cheapen the debate by making it all but impossible to progress beyond appeals to patriotism. But more fundamentally they confuse two important, but necessarily separate questions. First there is the question of whether torture is permitted under the current law. Emphatically is not, but the hearing obfuscated this by vaguely worded appeals to the second question of whether torture should be permitted. Clearly the Republicans on the Committee wanted to answer the latter in the affirmative, and to them, this needed the first question to be affirmatively answered too. The Democrat's by contrast correctly spotted the difference in the questions in trying to focus on the legality, not the justifiability, of what happened in the torture cases, but it was lost in the Republican patriotic onslaught. Of course, there are always going to be situations where a person can seek to justify torture, the ticking-time bomb scenario for example (and of course, it raised its head today), but extreme examples make for bad law, in just the same way that partisan politics makes for bad law.
A good example has to be Antonin Scalia's judgment in the recent Supreme Court case holding that Guantanamo detainees could petition the federal courts for their release where he stated simply that the judgment "will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed". Such judgments are scarily reminiscent of Mr Franks and the other Republicans on the committee and in my opinion have no place in a considered judgment of the highest court in the United States, or any other country. At best, such considerations can be an excuse, never a justification.
Law's cannot be set aside merely because they are inconvenient. Instead, they can be changed through the regular process. That's one of the fundamental tenets of the rule of law. Ideas that adherence that the rule of law can be conditioned by a 'but', or that the legality of action isn't actually that important are first steps on a very slippery slope and one that the Republicans on the committee should, frankly, be ashamed for even countenancing.
One of the perks of being an intern is that I get to sit in on some of the Senate and House hearings on issues as diverse as Parkinson's disease in military veterans to America's oil reserves. On Monday I attended a Senate Republican forum on the need to advance judicial nominations through the appointment process. Coming from a country where judges aren't appointed so much as annointed, the whole process of legislative approval seems odd, but all the more so when the impact of a shortage of judges on the legal process is properly considered. The problem was thus. The Democrats on the Judiciary Committee were refusing to hold hearings for some of President Bush's judicial nominations, citing a dubious rule that such hearings would be slowed in the year of a presidential election. Now, it seems unlikely that this rule exists, but even if it did, how can it possibly be right that politics interferes with the judicial and legal process? All of the witnesses made the same point convincingly, and the point seems so obvious so as not to need debate. So what was the point in the whole forum? I can only assume it was grandstanding. There were eight Republican Senators there, 8% of the whole, for two-hours, stating the blindingly obvious, asking questions designed to produce set piece answers and congratulating themselves on their sterling and tireless work on the committee.
I'm sure that given two-hours, these eight Senators could have made much more productive use of their time. Of course, the issue was important, and given the press-coverage of the forum hopefully their message got out - judicial appointments need to go forward. But it was for all the wrong reasons, to seek to portray the Democrats as stalers and spoilers, which they might well be, but the evidence suggested the Republicans did the same under Clinton, albeit to a slightly lesser extent. The whole thing only illustrates why law and politics do not mix.
The hearing I went to this morning threw this into sharp contrast. This morning saw one in a series of the House hearings on the torture and interrogration techniques used on terrorist suspects. The significance of the hearing was obvious from the length of the queue outside the room an hour before it started, and the number of protesters in the room. The Democrat-Republican divide was clear almost from the outset and it's a divide that in my opinion did the Republicans no favours whatsoever. There's a blog that I try to keep up to date with, called Head of Legal. It's written by a former legal advisor to Tony Blair, and is usually pretty spot on in its analysis. I'm nowhere near as qualified as he is, but I'd like to offer a few observances on what I saw today.
To say I was appalled would be an understatement, I couldn't actually go straight back to the office afterwards as I needed to cool down a bit. Almost immediately Mr Franks, the Republican ranking member asked why there had been no hearings on protecting the rights of American citizens and the need to move on from going over past acts - and there and then the debate was framed. While Democrats presented the hearing in terms of the need to uphold the rule of law and respect for the constitution at all times regardless of the wishes of the administration, the Republicans without fail resorted to putting the hearing into the context of 9/11, the dangers consequent, and the need to protect American lives and in so doing straight away lowered the level of debate. Two of my favourite quotes came from one Mr Pence who stated firstly that "I try not to think like a lawyer. I try to think like an American" to suggest the average American did not care about legal 'niceties', and secondly "It is imperative that the United States upholds the rule of law. But...", which I don't even think needs completing to illustrative the futility of the statement.
At one level, such appeals to 9/11 cheapen the debate by making it all but impossible to progress beyond appeals to patriotism. But more fundamentally they confuse two important, but necessarily separate questions. First there is the question of whether torture is permitted under the current law. Emphatically is not, but the hearing obfuscated this by vaguely worded appeals to the second question of whether torture should be permitted. Clearly the Republicans on the Committee wanted to answer the latter in the affirmative, and to them, this needed the first question to be affirmatively answered too. The Democrat's by contrast correctly spotted the difference in the questions in trying to focus on the legality, not the justifiability, of what happened in the torture cases, but it was lost in the Republican patriotic onslaught. Of course, there are always going to be situations where a person can seek to justify torture, the ticking-time bomb scenario for example (and of course, it raised its head today), but extreme examples make for bad law, in just the same way that partisan politics makes for bad law.
A good example has to be Antonin Scalia's judgment in the recent Supreme Court case holding that Guantanamo detainees could petition the federal courts for their release where he stated simply that the judgment "will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed". Such judgments are scarily reminiscent of Mr Franks and the other Republicans on the committee and in my opinion have no place in a considered judgment of the highest court in the United States, or any other country. At best, such considerations can be an excuse, never a justification.
Law's cannot be set aside merely because they are inconvenient. Instead, they can be changed through the regular process. That's one of the fundamental tenets of the rule of law. Ideas that adherence that the rule of law can be conditioned by a 'but', or that the legality of action isn't actually that important are first steps on a very slippery slope and one that the Republicans on the committee should, frankly, be ashamed for even countenancing.
13/07/2008
Goodness Gracious Great Falls of Water
Last Sunday, Corey came up with the idea of hiring bicycles and cycling up to Maryland and Great Falls National Park, and despite misgivings about the combination of sun, heat, lack of shade and the exercise inherent in cycling it turned out to be a very good idea.
I've never really associated cycling with America, but coming from Cambridge it seems pretty natural now, and fortunately the route up to Great Falls (or rather, the route we took) only had two major hills, both followed by equally (and probably more so) major downhill stints.
The round trip should have been about 28 miles, but we took a wrong turn on the way, and ended up cycling along the roads instead of the cycle path alongside the Potomac river. It seemed like a shame at the time, but it meant that we cycled there and back on different paths so at least got to see two different types of scenery - middle suburban America on the way there, white picket fences and all, and scenic national park America on the way back.
Admittedly the way back was nicer, primarily because it was flatter, but some of the neighbourhoods on the way there were interesting if only for their flagrant illustrations of what happens when you try to build a house to reflect, and go one better, than the one next door. At times it felt like cycling along Wisteria Lane.
At first it seemed that the Great Falls were anything but great, and looked little more than a weir, which would have been just a little disappointing. Fortunately though we were looking at the wrong bit, and buried behind the trees were the Great Falls themselves, and there were significantly greater than your everyday average weir.
The scale of the whole thing was breathtaking. When I was on the Amtrak train across America last year I got a sense of the scale of the country, but I didn't actually get to experience it behind sat in a steel train carriage. Cycling back through the park it was hard to believe that we were only 15 miles or so outside of Washington DC and not in the middle of Yellowstone or something similar. It really was like being in one of those cinematic Hollywood films. Everything is just so huge and dramatic looking, but naturally so. Looking over to the horizon, the park just seemed to continue on and when we emerged at the end, the river just dumped us into downtown DC as if it was the most natural place in the world.
Thankfully our $25 hire-bikes were pretty trouble free, despit two incidents of chains coming off, Charlie's brakes locking on, and Alex's bike refusing to change gear - a state of affairs that Emily had to remedy on more than one occasion.
On the way back we noticed that the place we hired the bikes from also hired canoes and rowing boats on the Potomac, I doubt we'd make 35 miles, but I'd be up for giving it a try.
Mr Ambassador, you're spoiling us
The reason I had to rush back from Mount Vernon was that the same evening we were going to the Bastille Day event at the French Embassy. Now, never having been to a social event at an Embassy before, I had no idea what to expect and so was basing my perceptions largely on the Ferrero Rocher adverts from a few years back.
Admittedly, the evening wasn't quite the same sort of affair, it wasn't black tie for a start, and there weren't any Ferroro Rocher, but there was plenty of just about everything else. The event itself was designed to raise money for the American-French Cultural Foundation, but inside it felt a little bit like a May Ball. There were five or six stalls from famous French restaurants all serving up portions of their signature dishes, and other pâtisserie stalls with desserts, biscuits and chocolates, and others with drinks. There was even a series of live cookery demonstrations, a raffle and an auction. Sadly, despite my intentions otherwise, I managed to repeat my performance at John Spencer's Brunch Party back in the first-year of University by eating far too much - I had to take indigestion tablets when I got back so that I could get to sleep. But what I did eat was very good indeed; from cassoulet to beef bourguignon, from snail quiche to pate, from prune and armagnac Breton cake to French meringues and from fine cheeses to bread, it was all there, and included in the entrance fee. So I can hardly be held accountable; especially as not drinking means I have to get my monies worth elsewhere!
But food aside, the evening was just really good fun. The event was a lot like Selwyn's May Ball in that it was really laid back with people just sitting around, talking or listening to the live music. Later in the evening some of the tables were cleared for us all to dance the rest of the night away, which we did.
Admittedly, the evening wasn't quite the same sort of affair, it wasn't black tie for a start, and there weren't any Ferroro Rocher, but there was plenty of just about everything else. The event itself was designed to raise money for the American-French Cultural Foundation, but inside it felt a little bit like a May Ball. There were five or six stalls from famous French restaurants all serving up portions of their signature dishes, and other pâtisserie stalls with desserts, biscuits and chocolates, and others with drinks. There was even a series of live cookery demonstrations, a raffle and an auction. Sadly, despite my intentions otherwise, I managed to repeat my performance at John Spencer's Brunch Party back in the first-year of University by eating far too much - I had to take indigestion tablets when I got back so that I could get to sleep. But what I did eat was very good indeed; from cassoulet to beef bourguignon, from snail quiche to pate, from prune and armagnac Breton cake to French meringues and from fine cheeses to bread, it was all there, and included in the entrance fee. So I can hardly be held accountable; especially as not drinking means I have to get my monies worth elsewhere!
But food aside, the evening was just really good fun. The event was a lot like Selwyn's May Ball in that it was really laid back with people just sitting around, talking or listening to the live music. Later in the evening some of the tables were cleared for us all to dance the rest of the night away, which we did.
An Badly Judged Plan
Occasionally I set out to do something, and soon regret I hadn't. Other times I set out to do something and it's only after a prolonged period that I wish I hadn't. Yesterday was sadly one of the latter occasions.
When I was in Washington DC mooting last year, I remember our tutor Professor Roelofsen mentioning how each time he and his wife were in DC that they would make the trip out to Mount Vernon, George Washington's home and burial place. Similarly, on each tour of the Capitol that I have to give I have a little bit to say about how George Washington came to be buried at Mount Vernon rather than in the Capitol as intended.
So feeling that I should see what all the fuss was about, at 9am on Saturday morning I set off to make the trip to Mount Vernon down in Virginia. At 12 noon, I stumbled through the gate there wondering how it had come to take me three-hours. Unfortunately, Metro works conspired to make for one of the least pleasant journeys that I've had in a while. Coupled with the fact that the bus from the Metro station to Mount Vernon only runs every hour, and with the heat, things were not good. I then had to queue for about 30 mins to buy an entrance ticket and then for about 45 mins to get into the mansion which I was shuffled through in about ten minutes, by which point I had barely enough time to walk around the grounds before having to catch the bus back to do the whole three-hour journey all over again to get back to DC. So I completely missed out on visiting the town of Old Alexandria, and didn't get a chance to do anything other than quickly walk through the museum at Mount Vernon. The moral being that you need considerably more than three hours there to come close to getting your monies worth.
But the place itself was nice, if sadly nothing spectacular. I'd actually say that I prefer almost all of the National Trust properties that I've been too in the UK over Mount Vernon. It's fine for what it is, but it's all a bit phony despite the fact that it's been restored. For instance, the mansion itself, despite being subtlety and elegantly designed, is actually made of wood, but it's been treated to look line stone.
In fact, the whole place felt like it was designed to entertain, rather than be just what it is - the place where George Washington lived. That's fine to an extent, but the huge visitors centre, and slightly cringe worthy (but admittedly cinematic) opening movie and narrated introduction all conspired against the tranquility of the place. Not to mention the presence of Pizza Hut.
It's not hard to see why George Washington wanted to live, and be buried, there. The setting of the estate is lovely, backing onto the Potomac river, and bounded by green rollings fields and forests it really could be a piece of little England.
Perhaps some of my ill-feeling comes from the fact that I simply didn't have enough time there to make the most of it, or to really see everything on offer without wondering if I had enough time to make it back to catch the bus and Metro. But that said, I never really got the feeling that I was walking through somewhere that deserved as much attention and adoration as Mount Vernon seems to get. If I get the chance perhaps I'll go back again on my way to Alexandria, but until then I'm going to be left feeling neutral at best, which is a shame for a place that so many people seem to rate so highly.
When I was in Washington DC mooting last year, I remember our tutor Professor Roelofsen mentioning how each time he and his wife were in DC that they would make the trip out to Mount Vernon, George Washington's home and burial place. Similarly, on each tour of the Capitol that I have to give I have a little bit to say about how George Washington came to be buried at Mount Vernon rather than in the Capitol as intended.
So feeling that I should see what all the fuss was about, at 9am on Saturday morning I set off to make the trip to Mount Vernon down in Virginia. At 12 noon, I stumbled through the gate there wondering how it had come to take me three-hours. Unfortunately, Metro works conspired to make for one of the least pleasant journeys that I've had in a while. Coupled with the fact that the bus from the Metro station to Mount Vernon only runs every hour, and with the heat, things were not good. I then had to queue for about 30 mins to buy an entrance ticket and then for about 45 mins to get into the mansion which I was shuffled through in about ten minutes, by which point I had barely enough time to walk around the grounds before having to catch the bus back to do the whole three-hour journey all over again to get back to DC. So I completely missed out on visiting the town of Old Alexandria, and didn't get a chance to do anything other than quickly walk through the museum at Mount Vernon. The moral being that you need considerably more than three hours there to come close to getting your monies worth.
But the place itself was nice, if sadly nothing spectacular. I'd actually say that I prefer almost all of the National Trust properties that I've been too in the UK over Mount Vernon. It's fine for what it is, but it's all a bit phony despite the fact that it's been restored. For instance, the mansion itself, despite being subtlety and elegantly designed, is actually made of wood, but it's been treated to look line stone.
In fact, the whole place felt like it was designed to entertain, rather than be just what it is - the place where George Washington lived. That's fine to an extent, but the huge visitors centre, and slightly cringe worthy (but admittedly cinematic) opening movie and narrated introduction all conspired against the tranquility of the place. Not to mention the presence of Pizza Hut.
It's not hard to see why George Washington wanted to live, and be buried, there. The setting of the estate is lovely, backing onto the Potomac river, and bounded by green rollings fields and forests it really could be a piece of little England.
Perhaps some of my ill-feeling comes from the fact that I simply didn't have enough time there to make the most of it, or to really see everything on offer without wondering if I had enough time to make it back to catch the bus and Metro. But that said, I never really got the feeling that I was walking through somewhere that deserved as much attention and adoration as Mount Vernon seems to get. If I get the chance perhaps I'll go back again on my way to Alexandria, but until then I'm going to be left feeling neutral at best, which is a shame for a place that so many people seem to rate so highly.
Food, glorious food
Before we came out here we had a briefing back at the ESU in London, and one of the few things I remember information wise was that last year everyone put on weight during their internships. So far though I think we've all been doing pretty well in the food regime department despite the gargantuan temptations constantly on offer.
Obviously being on a budget helps, but it seems that America is on a health-drive at the moment. In fact, tonight Corey cooked dinner and ten of us got through enough food for thirty-two portions according to the packet, but it really wasn't anywhere near that.
However, despite these encouraging signs, sometimes things don't quite work out, and Friday was such a day (so was Saturday in fact, but more on that in the next entry). After having breakfast in the flat, I went to a talk by the British Minister for Europe at the Brookings Institute up the road from here, where there was another free breakfast for all participants, which of course I had to partake of. That afternoon it was Liz's (one of the legislative-assistants in my Congressman's office) birthday, which meant that there was both free blueberry and apple pie.
But the crowning glory in the food stakes came on my walk home. From Congress, I decided to walk up Pennsylvania Avenue and along the way I passed the Old Post Office.
When I was in Washington DC with my parents about five years ago I remember we popped inside so I decided to retread our steps and was immediately greeted by the sight of Larry's Cookies and one particular memory from those years passed. When I was here then I spotted a Rocky Road cookie, which in my youth was quite something to behold with its promises of chocolate, nuts, toffee and more chocolate. Naturally, my advancing years meant my pulse didn't race quite so much this time, but I still ordered one to re-live my excitement. Sadly, although the cookie was still good, the rampant heat outside practically turned it to slush in my hands. Some memories are best left alone I guess.
But the walk itself was pleasant, and the view from the top of the Post Office tower was as impressive as I remembered. In one direction you could look down Pennsylvania Avenue towards the Capitol where I started, and in the other over to the Washington Monument and the Mall.
Just a shame about the cookie.
Obviously being on a budget helps, but it seems that America is on a health-drive at the moment. In fact, tonight Corey cooked dinner and ten of us got through enough food for thirty-two portions according to the packet, but it really wasn't anywhere near that.
However, despite these encouraging signs, sometimes things don't quite work out, and Friday was such a day (so was Saturday in fact, but more on that in the next entry). After having breakfast in the flat, I went to a talk by the British Minister for Europe at the Brookings Institute up the road from here, where there was another free breakfast for all participants, which of course I had to partake of. That afternoon it was Liz's (one of the legislative-assistants in my Congressman's office) birthday, which meant that there was both free blueberry and apple pie.
But the crowning glory in the food stakes came on my walk home. From Congress, I decided to walk up Pennsylvania Avenue and along the way I passed the Old Post Office.
When I was in Washington DC with my parents about five years ago I remember we popped inside so I decided to retread our steps and was immediately greeted by the sight of Larry's Cookies and one particular memory from those years passed. When I was here then I spotted a Rocky Road cookie, which in my youth was quite something to behold with its promises of chocolate, nuts, toffee and more chocolate. Naturally, my advancing years meant my pulse didn't race quite so much this time, but I still ordered one to re-live my excitement. Sadly, although the cookie was still good, the rampant heat outside practically turned it to slush in my hands. Some memories are best left alone I guess.
But the walk itself was pleasant, and the view from the top of the Post Office tower was as impressive as I remembered. In one direction you could look down Pennsylvania Avenue towards the Capitol where I started, and in the other over to the Washington Monument and the Mall.
Just a shame about the cookie.
11/07/2008
At the old Ball Game
Being fully in the 'when in Rome' spirit, yesterday evening we ventured over to the over side of town to watch the Washington Nationals baseball team play the Arizona Diamondbacks. Fortunately, Hannah, one of our number, knew the rules and spent the whole evening explaining what was happening to the rest of us.
I've been to two baseballs before in Chicago, and I never really understood what was going on at either, so it was good to finally understand just how the game plays out. And we were lucky in being there when the Nationals, or Nats, scored a home-run with all their bases loaded. The Nationals are apparently the worst team in the league, so with the final score being 5-0 to the Nationals some federal celebrating was in order.
Our $15 seats actually turned out to be pretty decent - we had a good birds eye view of what was going on. The stadium itself was pretty amazing, apparently it's new, and it showed in still being pretty gleaming. Baseball seems to be more than an event, it's more of a pastime. Just as we were leaving during thee eighth innings, a couple who had only just arrived came and sat next to us. It's a bit of a dip-in-dip-out sport and more of a fun evening out with the atmosphere of thousands of people there for the same reason, than just a ball game. For $15 I think it was a pretty good bargain.
I've been to two baseballs before in Chicago, and I never really understood what was going on at either, so it was good to finally understand just how the game plays out. And we were lucky in being there when the Nationals, or Nats, scored a home-run with all their bases loaded. The Nationals are apparently the worst team in the league, so with the final score being 5-0 to the Nationals some federal celebrating was in order.
Our $15 seats actually turned out to be pretty decent - we had a good birds eye view of what was going on. The stadium itself was pretty amazing, apparently it's new, and it showed in still being pretty gleaming. Baseball seems to be more than an event, it's more of a pastime. Just as we were leaving during thee eighth innings, a couple who had only just arrived came and sat next to us. It's a bit of a dip-in-dip-out sport and more of a fun evening out with the atmosphere of thousands of people there for the same reason, than just a ball game. For $15 I think it was a pretty good bargain.
09/07/2008
A Tour of Duty
I'd very much like to regale you with my internship experiences within the office, but I fear that to do so would breach too many confidentiality and secrecy laws to be even worth thinking about. As an example, part of the office routine is giving tours of the building to constituents who visit Washington from Florida. Today some such constituents brought along a box of expensive looking chocolates as a thank-you gift, but had to return with them as the House ethics rules prevented us from taking them lest it be seen as giving them a tour in return for a 'favour'. Ridiculous of course, but what can you do other than cry as some fine chocolates return from whence they came.
So instead of filling you in on the (admittedly little) that has happened so far, I'll restrict myself to something of a pictorial review of Washington. After the frolics of Independence Day, Saturday turned into something of a lesser event. I had much shopping to be done while some of the others went to some of the museums and galleries that are two-a-penny in Washington. On Saturday evening we went to an interesting house party for the son of the ESU guy in Washington in a nice house about three miles from here. We got a taxi there, but I decided to walk back home through the leafy suburb and then through the district of Georgetown and back to our apartment. It turned out to be a good call. The evening was balmy and the walk was really nice. Georgetown really is a lovely area of town, much more European in feel, no big shopping malls or department stalls so it's a shame that it's not really near here, nor on the way to anywhere, but I should imagine that I'll get back there before long.
On Sunday morning, Yoosun, Cecily and I headed off to walk around some of the more famous monuments around here. We started off with the Vietnam War Memorial, a very powerful, yet very simple memorial consisting merely of a sunken black marble wall with the names of all the US fatalities carved into it. After that, we strolled through the park to the Lincoln Memorial looking out towards the Washington Monument and beyond to Capitol Hill.
There's something about the Lincoln Memorial. I'll probably always associate it with that Simpsons episode where he talks to Lisa Simpson, but beyond the magnificence of the sculpture, it is a powerful place, all the more so at night. It's disappointing that once you go inside, almost all of the visitors stick to the sculpture of the man himself, and ignore the carvings of his Gettysburg Address and second inaugural speech entirely - there's a wisdom in those words that only serves to enhance the man and what he did, and it's a shame that they seem to be ignored by many.
From Lincoln we came to the Korean War Memorial, which is strangely haunting compared to the sombre neutrality of the Vietnam Memorial.
It's a memorial that I feel slightly uncomfortable taking photos of - although not to the extent that I wouldn't, like at the Vietnam one - the bleakness of the scene, of soldiers marching through a mine infested swamp land, is one that it's too easy to forget is actually based on reality. Perhaps more so than most commemorative monuments, this one really, in my opinion, makes clear the horrors that it represents.
Onwards took us through the more uplifting, and unique, memorial to Franklin Roosevelt. Commissioned by President Clinton, the FDR Memorial is more a walk-through celebration of him as President consisting of a walk through a stone bounded passage with various scenes and quotes from his time as President, and to that extent, it's unlike any other similar memorial I know of.
Walking on from there takes you around the tidal basin of the Potomac River, and around to the Jefferson Memorial - more traditional in form, but still impressive.
Like Lincoln, Jefferson is bounded by quotations from speeches of his, and again, like Lincoln, they often seem ignored by those visiting. Which is odd, because Jefferson and Lincoln were partly the people they were just because of what they said - one doesn't really make sense without the other. Finally we walked back towards the Washington Monument and the World War Two Memorial, a more grandiose walk-through construction.
After a much needed rest and heat stop we caught the Metro over to Arlington National Cemetery. Arlington, set over 600 acres of hillside on the outskirts of Washington near the Pentagon is a powerful place, containing the graves of hundreds of thousands of US soldiers killed in action, and of other prominent figures, including astronauts and Presidents. It's sheer size is what makes it almost impossible to comprehend.
And the slightly disconcerting thing is that I want to say it's a nice place. The green rolling hills make it a lovely place to stroll around, and were it not for the heat, we probably would have done so for longer, but you're constantly aware of just what it is you're walking around within. I suppose in a way that that is Arlington's success, it is more than just a cemetery, it's a place people can just go and walk around to appreciate it for itself.
Perhaps that's what I like so much about Washington. I'm not usually that keen on huge monuments to history, but in Washington's case, I really think the way it's been done, planned and laid out actually works well. They've all become part of the landscape rather than sitting awkwardly on top of what's already there. Of course, it helps that Washington is a 'new' city to accommodate everything, but more than anything, they made for a lovely day's walking, which can't often be said of walking within a city. Washington really is my kind of town.
So instead of filling you in on the (admittedly little) that has happened so far, I'll restrict myself to something of a pictorial review of Washington. After the frolics of Independence Day, Saturday turned into something of a lesser event. I had much shopping to be done while some of the others went to some of the museums and galleries that are two-a-penny in Washington. On Saturday evening we went to an interesting house party for the son of the ESU guy in Washington in a nice house about three miles from here. We got a taxi there, but I decided to walk back home through the leafy suburb and then through the district of Georgetown and back to our apartment. It turned out to be a good call. The evening was balmy and the walk was really nice. Georgetown really is a lovely area of town, much more European in feel, no big shopping malls or department stalls so it's a shame that it's not really near here, nor on the way to anywhere, but I should imagine that I'll get back there before long.
On Sunday morning, Yoosun, Cecily and I headed off to walk around some of the more famous monuments around here. We started off with the Vietnam War Memorial, a very powerful, yet very simple memorial consisting merely of a sunken black marble wall with the names of all the US fatalities carved into it. After that, we strolled through the park to the Lincoln Memorial looking out towards the Washington Monument and beyond to Capitol Hill.
There's something about the Lincoln Memorial. I'll probably always associate it with that Simpsons episode where he talks to Lisa Simpson, but beyond the magnificence of the sculpture, it is a powerful place, all the more so at night. It's disappointing that once you go inside, almost all of the visitors stick to the sculpture of the man himself, and ignore the carvings of his Gettysburg Address and second inaugural speech entirely - there's a wisdom in those words that only serves to enhance the man and what he did, and it's a shame that they seem to be ignored by many.
From Lincoln we came to the Korean War Memorial, which is strangely haunting compared to the sombre neutrality of the Vietnam Memorial.
It's a memorial that I feel slightly uncomfortable taking photos of - although not to the extent that I wouldn't, like at the Vietnam one - the bleakness of the scene, of soldiers marching through a mine infested swamp land, is one that it's too easy to forget is actually based on reality. Perhaps more so than most commemorative monuments, this one really, in my opinion, makes clear the horrors that it represents.
Onwards took us through the more uplifting, and unique, memorial to Franklin Roosevelt. Commissioned by President Clinton, the FDR Memorial is more a walk-through celebration of him as President consisting of a walk through a stone bounded passage with various scenes and quotes from his time as President, and to that extent, it's unlike any other similar memorial I know of.
Walking on from there takes you around the tidal basin of the Potomac River, and around to the Jefferson Memorial - more traditional in form, but still impressive.
Like Lincoln, Jefferson is bounded by quotations from speeches of his, and again, like Lincoln, they often seem ignored by those visiting. Which is odd, because Jefferson and Lincoln were partly the people they were just because of what they said - one doesn't really make sense without the other. Finally we walked back towards the Washington Monument and the World War Two Memorial, a more grandiose walk-through construction.
After a much needed rest and heat stop we caught the Metro over to Arlington National Cemetery. Arlington, set over 600 acres of hillside on the outskirts of Washington near the Pentagon is a powerful place, containing the graves of hundreds of thousands of US soldiers killed in action, and of other prominent figures, including astronauts and Presidents. It's sheer size is what makes it almost impossible to comprehend.
And the slightly disconcerting thing is that I want to say it's a nice place. The green rolling hills make it a lovely place to stroll around, and were it not for the heat, we probably would have done so for longer, but you're constantly aware of just what it is you're walking around within. I suppose in a way that that is Arlington's success, it is more than just a cemetery, it's a place people can just go and walk around to appreciate it for itself.
Perhaps that's what I like so much about Washington. I'm not usually that keen on huge monuments to history, but in Washington's case, I really think the way it's been done, planned and laid out actually works well. They've all become part of the landscape rather than sitting awkwardly on top of what's already there. Of course, it helps that Washington is a 'new' city to accommodate everything, but more than anything, they made for a lovely day's walking, which can't often be said of walking within a city. Washington really is my kind of town.
06/07/2008
Independence Day, or Loser's Day?
On Thursday I ventured into the local Trader Joe's to do some shopping and was asked at the check-out whether I planned on celebrating the 4th July - Independence Day. Tongue firmly in cheek I replied that I didn't see what I had to celebrate about, which fortunately was taken for the joke that it was. But it's an interesting point nonetheless. On my first day in work I joined one of the other interns on a tour of the building given to constituents and when he was talking about the British burning Washington I felt about ten eyes all on me, so I did the whole British 'no hard feelings?' routine.
But July 4th itself wasn't quite what I, or I think what anyone else, was expecting. I'd expected it to be this huge day of national outpouring, but that wasn't what I saw. Simply put there just weren't as many people around as I would have expected at such a major event. The day started off with a ceremonial reading of the Declaration of Independence outside the National Archives before the annual parade set off down Constitution Avenue along the Mall. The first few parts of the parade were nice, the Army, Navy, Air Force etc all decked out and marching perfectly.
But afterwards it descended somewhat into a more carnival type affair, with school marching band after marching band, and some really oddly placed giant inflatable blimps and floats - the American Mustang society anyone?
I did though appreciate the appearance made by Miss American Military Idol 2008. Unfortunately the whole parade rather petered out, ending with a bright yellow Penske hire van bringing up the rear, behind the float of the Taiwanese Friends of America.
Sadly, the day was so hot that we decided to head back to the apartment and to the safety of our air-conditioned rooms. But in the evening after dinner we ventured out again to the East Mall to watch the concert in front of Capitol Hill. Unfortunately we left too late to see that much of it, and only caught a few acts before moving on. But despite the brief visit, the event was much more what I expecting from the day - there were more people and there was an atmosphere that was lacking from earlier on.
After staying only a few minutes we were incredibly lucky as Corey, one of the other interns had managed to get us invitations to a roof viewing of the fireworks from one of the administrative buildings serving the House of Represenatives, so we all clambered out through his office window onto the balcony to watch the July 4th fireworks set to the 1812 overture.
Oddly we bumped into another English intern on the roof who was also over here for the Summer, but no-one seemed to mind their former oppressors enjoying the event on top of one of their administrative buildings. In fact, on the way back God Save the Queen, Jerusalem, and Land of Hope and Glory were all sung down along the Mall, but sadly they elicited no response, apart from one person who misheard the song and chastised her boyfriend for not singing too. I was a bit miffed to hear what I thought was God Save the Queen being played at the parade only to find out that apparently it was just the same music with different words - and to think that I was about to come over all patriotic.
Perhaps that was what was missing. I was expecting a patriotic outpouring, but it had more of the atmosphere of just being a day out in DC with some entertainment. And that's not necessarily a bad thing, it just wasn't quite what I expected to see, and I guess that disappointed slightly. But in hindsight, it's actually quite nice that people could just enjoy the day for what it is, a celebration, rather than having to stifle the feeling with political overtones that are probably more suited to times gone by.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)