That is what we want. We are talking about how we tackle poverty and tackling schools and education underachievement is lionel to the life of our children. Mr. Speaker, can i ask the Prime Minister he has not answered the question. Can the Prime Minister assure the people of my constituency that an elected mp will not be given minority seating in dundee and moreover, does he [shouting] spill we are very grateful because he has had a very clear answer but maybe the snp dont like this answer but the proposal that we discussed at great length in the last parliament for solving this issue now be introduced. They key point i would make is that if in some future parliament theres disagreement between english mps who want one thing and the house of commons as a whole that was another thing, they would have to be away on resolving this deadlock. This is effectively a block for english mps. It is not the ability to legislate in willynilly, he should know that if you read the manifesto. Does the
Beverly so, we will go ahead and get started since the moment has arrived. Others may trickle in from lunch, but thank you and welcome here to this panel on the Church Committee at 40. My name is beverly gage. I am a history professor at yale. And i will be up here mostly timekeeping and asking some questions. Before i introduce the panelists, i just wanted to say a few words about the genesis of this panel, the idea behind it and some of the issues i hope we are going to be able to address. So this year, 2015, marks the 40th anniversary of one of the most important congressional committees certainly of the 1970s. And i think arguably of the latter half of the 20th century and that was the Church Committee. The Church Committee which was chaired by Senator Frank Church began its work in the spring of 1975. And for the 16 months between the spring of 1975 and when they delivered 14 volumes of reports in 1976, the Church Committee held hearings, performed investigations, dug into Backgro
Historians hosted this 90minute discussion at their annual meeting in st. Louis. We will go ahead and get started since the moment has arrived and others may trickle in after lunch. My name is beverly gage. Im a history professor at gail and i will be here mostly chairing and timekeeping and asking some questions, but before i introduce the panelists , i just wanted to say a few words about the genesis of this panel, the idea behind it, and some of the issues i hope we will be able to address. This year, 2015, marks the audience anniversary of one of the most important congressional committees, certainly, of the 1970s, and i think arguably of the latter half of the 20th century, and that was the Church Committee. The Church Committee was chaired by idaho Senator Frank Church and the committee began its work in the spring of 1975, and the Church Committee held hearings performed investigations, dug into Background Materials on the American Intelligence Services this was the first mass s
Schwartz who was the committees chief counsel. And here in our studio in washington is Elliot Maxwell who was counsel to the committee as Pennsylvania Republican senator richard swiekers designee. Thanks to both of you. In this our third installment in this series were looking into the Church Committees hearing on possible excesses by the federal bureau of investigation. Rich schwartz former chief counsel for the Church Committee, on november 18, 1975, you testified before the Senate Committee to share the staffs findings in an investigation of fbi intelligence activities. Were good to show a clip of you reading anonymous letter that the fbi sent to Martin Luther king. Lets watch. The bureau went so far as to mail anonymous letters to dr. King and his wife which were mailed shortly before he he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize and finishes with this suggestion. King, there is only one thing left for you to do. You know what it is. You have just 34 days in which to do it. This exact nu
They often cant do that. What often happens is the president acts through history, the president has acted and Congress Even where many of them may disagree with his use of power have been unable to muster the political will to check him. That creates a precedent for future action. A recent example of that is libya. In libya, we were involved in 2011 in bottoming libya. Many congress spoke out against that. The president was in violation of his war powers but no action evolved to curb his activity in that case. What weve seen over time is power evolving toward the president. This doesnt mean that the congress is no longer important at all in in area. They still have a significant role to play primarily flowing from the idea that they are the orally the branch of our government that is supposed to declare war. We dont declare war anymore. Thats become obsolete since the 1940s but we have modern day equivalents of that. Theres still a role for congress in determining when we use force. T